Skip to main content

Full text of "Mark Felt"

See other formats


ALL DIFOEHATIOH COHTAIHED 

HEPEIM IS DHCLASSIFIeB 

DATE 03-02-^'2009 E\%,6Sl79 daai/baw/sbs 








MTtD STATES DISTRICT COURT 

o'jtiIEr:; district of kew tork 

X 

UDITH CLARK, et al. . 

Plaintiffs , 

- against - 

iNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al. , 
Defendants. 




<J 


1 ! 


riLEO 

/P' 

I (MY 17 1973 


^0. OF 

a:iecded 

PROTECT ORDER 
78 Civ. 2244 (MEL) 


Plaintiffs having moved this Court for an order to 
tect the discovery process and to further the interests of 

* 

tice, and the Court having duly considered Che matter, it 
ORDERED Chat: 

jj 1. No document identifiable with any plaintiff in 

jjche possession, custody or control of the individual defendants 
jor Government agency defendants shall be destroyed or obliterated 
jin any manner pending a final detercTiination of this action, 
|including any appeals, or upon further order of this Court; 
j 2(a). All documents referred to in, and protected 

iby t s order shall be placed and maintained under supervisory 
!cont'- 1 of the Court in the physical custody of any person or 

j ' ■ ' 

jagency now in possession of such records who shall be responsible 
for the physical integrity of the documents. Any defendant 
[which has in its possession any of the documents shall be bound 
[by its terms. 

3(a). A copy of this order shall be circulated 
to each field office and legal attaches of the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation ("FBI’*) as well as any organizational unit within 
the headquarters of the FBI. Additionally, copies of the order 
[will be circulated to appropriate officials of the Postal Service 
and Department of Justice having custody of documents identifiable 



to any plaintiff. 





not" recorded 

JUN 1 1 ^979 


Greenberg/Gray-2895 



(b) . /A copy of this order shall be placed in 
: ^ 

' each volume or section of all FBI main files identifiable as 
; relating to plaintiffs. 

(c) . The FBI shall prepare an index, of all 
main files referred to in 3(b) above, specifying the serial 
numbers of documents contained in each file and the location 

i of each file. A copy of the index' shall be furnished to 

l| _ , 

attorneys^ and to the Court. 

4. Documents protected by this order include (a) 
all records of any kind and description which have been ' 
garnered in connection with past and present investigations 
and may be garnered in connection with future investigations 
of any plaintiff, including but not limited to records which 
are identifiable to plaintiffs though contained in records 
1 pertaining to investigations of organizations or individuals 
i with which any plaintiff may have had or may have affilia- 

i' 

r tiens, and (b) directives or guidelines governing the conduct 

\\ of such investigations, including but not limited to the FBI 

i 

!: Kanuel of Instructions and Attorney General Guidelines, 
i 5. All documents compiled in the course of the 

I 

i prosecution or defense of United States v. Gray and United 
! States V. Felt and Hiller , 78-000179 (Bryant, C.J.), 

I — ' ' 

I 

1 excluding attorneys* work products, shall be subject to the 
pr visions of paragraphs 1 and 2 of this order. At the 
cc.. elusion of the prosecutions, all documents covered by 
this order shall be maintained in the custody of attorneys, 
or their successors in control of such documents pending 
j final determination of this action. 


Greenberg/Gray- 2896 



6 . 


«« 






Nothing in this order shall preclude* the 


handling, necessary marking of docamencs. or necessary 
alteration of copies of documents in the ordinary course of 
business or trial preparation by anyone in possession of the 
documents. 


7. It is the intent of the Court that this order 
shall be broadly construed so as to prevent the destruction of 

y documents. In the event of any question aef endant^ ^ 

ncerning the scope and coverage of this order, or any 
2 stion concerning whether any particular documents come 
zhin the designated scope and coverage of this order, the 
: ocuments in question will not be destroyed or obliterated 
in whole^ or part, until either: (a) they are presented to 
- p l a i nt - i^o and n 'f nt i /f o * " O t t w^eys for examination and 

p lai^ n- ^ ffar by their attorneys, stipulate in vriting that 
the documents may be destroyed or obliterated in whole or 
part; or (b) the Court, after a hearing duly noticed, exempts 
the specified documents in question from its order. 

8, ' In' addition to specific instructions concerning 
communication of the contents of this order contained herein, 
defendants and their attorneys shall communicate the contents 
of this order forthwith to, all appropriate individuals so as 
to a sure the effectuation and compliance with the order by 
all persons. 


9. Within 30 days, defendants shall report to the 
Court all steps taken so as to assure the effectuation and 
compliance with this order by all persons. 

Dated: New York, New York 



i 


Greenberg/Gray- 2897 



FD-36 (k^. 5-&a-78) 

V- 

■f 

TRANSMIT VIA: 

I I Teletype ^ 

I I Facsimile 
□ 


4 



FBI 


:bi 


PRECEDENCE: 
I I Immediate 
i I Priority 
I I R out ine 


AIRTEL 


CLASSIFICATION: 

□ TOP SECRET 

□ SECRET 

□ CONFIDENTIAL 

□ UNCLAS E F T 0 

□ UNCLAS. 

Pat. 4/25/79 




UNITED STAT^^VERSUS 
L. PATRICK G'SaY III . 
DISCOVERY PROCEEDIN.GS. 



DIRECTOR, FBI ; ATTN: 
K^leGAT, OTTAWA (62-548) 


ET AL; 



ctawa cable 3/|22/79 and Bureau R/S 3/29/79 . 


'■Re 



3 Bureau (®nc . 2 ) , 

(1 - Foreign , Liaison) (Direct) 
1 - Ottawa 





ILL IlFORl'IlTIOl COUTAIl-ED 
HERE II IS OTCLJkSSIFIED EXit: 




:ept 


CONFL 


, MATERIAL ATTACHEI 
>1 



15 MAY 1 1979 


SD FROH ATJTOimTIC 
5 SIFICATIOM 
RCTY DERIVED FROH: 
jrOlUlTIC DICLASSIFICATIOH GUIE‘l 

rjcoii CODE 2sxi:s) 





|^|Greenberg/Gray-2898, 



Transmitted 


Per 


(Number) 


(Time) 
























ALL IlFOPJ-IATIOl COITAIMD 
HERE II IS OTCLASSIFIED EXCEPT 
wmm .SHOII-I 4)TBER1ISE V 

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT 

Memorandum 




SEeRET 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 


Assoc. Oir. 

Dep. AD Adm. , 

Dep. AD Inv, 1 ^ 

Asst. Dir,: 

Adm. Servs. 

Crim. Inv. ^ 

Ident. ! 

Intel! 



Laboratory 
Lego! Coun. 

Plan. & Insp. 

Rec. Mgnt, 

Tech. Servs. 

Troinin*g 

Public Affs, Off 

Telephone Rm. 

Director’s Sec’y 



PURPOSE : To advise of Department's certification of 

completion of discovery and intention to seek 
in camera ex parte hearing. 

DETAILS : By letters dated 3/30/79, (copies attached) 

the Department asserted to the Court discovery 
has been completed. 


In the letter filed openly discovery is declared 
completed by the government and issues remaining minimized, 
with camera handling predicted. Additional releases^©# 
NSA and CIA information are cited. 


(S) 


(S) 


Additional CIA information wa s placed invthe 
Department's vault for defense review. | 

r 



... l:l-i 1^0 yy - /7^ 



bl 


Enclosures (2) 


APR 25 1979 





Adams 

H! ff i ‘ ' 

McDermopt..' 

Steel 

Cregar' 

Mintz 

O'Brien 

Daly 


’ i 




(CONTINUED - OVER) 





IXIHPTED -FROH AUTOl-IATIC 
DICLASSIFICATIOM 
AUTHORITY DIRIUED FROH; 

FBI AUTOI-OITIC DECLASSIFICATIOH GUIDE 
EXEMPT I OH CODE 2SX(1) 

DATE 03-02-2009 


53 ^^ 13 1979 Savings Bonds |Regularly on the 


FBI/ DOJ 



Memorandxim from Mr. Tierney to Mr. O'Brien 
Re: Mark Felt 


A second letter, filed under seal, reveals the 
prosecution's intent to proceed ex parte . The substitution 
of materials for the foreign source documents is outlined, 
and the redesignation of domestic intelligence investi- 
gations as foreign intelligence operations is mentioned. 
Both have been ordered produced by the Court. 

The foreign source materials are covered by the 
three affidavits of Paul V. Daly, and the redesignations 
are to be covered by an affidavit by Mary Lawton, Deputy 
Assistant Attorney General, which is still under discussion. 
We have been invited to participate in the discussions on 
the Lawton affidavit and will advise of any difficulties 
encountered. 

RECOMMENDATION ; None. ' For information. 




APPROVEDx.i;^ Adm. Serv 

Dlrector_ ^ ' 

f5oc. Din 
Jep. AD|^rr 
Dep. AD Kv. 


fntefi. ^ , 
Laboratory 




Legal Coun.5^«t*al94- 
Plan. & lnsp. ^^^^!T> 
Rec Mgnt. 

Tech. Servs7~ 

Training 
Public AffsTOffT 


- 2 - 


r 


Greenberg/Gray-2902 






Addreaa Reply to the 
Diviuon Indicated 
and Refer to InitiaU and Number 

FJM: ams 


UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

WASHINGTON’, D.C. 20530 


March 30, 1979 


Honorable William B. Bryant 
Chief Judge 

U.S. District Courthouse of the 
District of Columbia 
U.S. Courthouse 

3rd & Constitution Avenue, W.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20001 

Re : United States v. Felt, et al (Crim. No. 78-000179) 


Dear Judge Bryant, 

The government has completed its discovery. Various 
"house cleaning" details have been resolved with the assistance 
of defense counsel. Furthermore, after discussion with defense 
counsel, the governm.ent has voluntarily produced, and undertaken 
to produce, additional documents that will be helpful in 
forging stipulations for trial. Finally, as to the "foreign 
involvement" of the VJeatherman, in light of the Court's February 
22 rulings with respect to the Barker-Mar tinez defense, govern- 
ment counsel conducted an extensive review’ of possible ways of 
lessening redactions. The Federal Bureau of Investigation, 
the National Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency 
have all released substantial am.ounts of information that had 
previously been withheld. For example, five documents con- 
taining CIA information which v/ere the subject of redaction 


ALL FBI IIIFOHHATIOK COHTAIHED 

HEREIN IS UNCLASSIFIED 

DATE 03-02-2009 BY 65179 dmlx/baw/sbs 





^eenberg/Gray-2903 




2 




complaints by counsel for Mr. Miller have been released in 
substantially unredact form. 

The government anticipates that some dispute will remain 
as to the adequacy of the government's compliance with discovery 
and that ^ camera resolution of those disputes by the Court 
will be necessary. However, the government reiterates that 
the discovery phase of this case is over and that defense 
coxmsel are fully informed so as to be able to proceed V7ith 
preparation for trial. 


Sincerely , 


Francis J. Martin 
Trial Attorney 
Criminal Division 


cc; Brian P. Gettings, Esquire 
Thomas A. Kennelly, Esquire 


Greenberg/Gray- 2904 



Greenberg/Gray-2981 



OJ-lMCn OP TJ IE HR!',SIDr:NT 
CHARLES H. STANLEY 


5 BELAIR 

N'ORlif LI ITI.E ROCK, ARK./i^lie 




PllKXAE SOlSlGSB 


March 15, 1979 



The Honorable Griffin B. Bell inforhatioij coiirrAUiED 

The Attorney General ^ hekeii is ukclassified 

U. S. Department of Justice date 03-02-2009 by 65179 dmii/baw/sijs 

Washington, D.C. 

Dear Judge Bell: 

In a public proclamation in July, 1978, the Society of Former' 
Special Agents of the Inc. , called for the dismissal of the 

indictment of L. Patrick Gray . W. Mark Pelt, and Edward S. Miller as 
not being in the best interests of the American citizens or this 
Nation. Now, with international terrorism and Communist imperialism, 
on the increase, as President of our Society, I am appealing to yo^u 
to dismiss this prosecution. 

This action is taken at the insistence of our National Board 
of Directors, the leaders of our six National Regions, and the more 
than 7,400 aroused members in our 94 chapters across the country who 
are irrevocably dedicated to righting this miscarriage of justice. 

In our personal contacts throughout the country, we are convinced the 
American public supports us. ) i<H S'- /'Tf 

We have witnessed major foreign terrorism, including the 
Entebbe hostage incident, the Munich Olympics massacre, the Vienna 
OPEC attack, and the wanton murders of Aldo Moro and Hans-Martin 
Schleyer. Recently, the tragic events in Iran, the assassination 
of our United States Ambassador in Afghanistan, and the increasing 
Communist designs in South America spotlight our Nation's vulner- 
ability. Lack of accurate foreign intelligence data is crippling 

our Nation's decision-making ability in world affairs. Su-geJ-v . thi s 

is not the time to further weaken the intelligence community through 
the trial of public servants who sought to protect our co®®tj^|\j 22 

V7e feel that you - a renowned jurist and the Nati«onJ.& 
legal authority - must be sorely tried in conscience by the Gray- 
Felt-Miller cases - a prosecution that rests on a retrospective, 
retroactive, essentially ex post facto prosecutorial thesis which is 
anathema to^fair play, due process and fundamental justice. 

IL. Mi^Society members with expertise in the legal field interpret, 
the "rule of law" as giving the Attorney General the unquestioned „ 

discretion to initiate and/or terminate a federal prosecution and 
believe that precedent exists for you, as Attorney General, to nol- 


LCl L 

/' 





Honorable Griffin B. Bell 
March 15, 1979 
Page Two 

As the Court said in United States v. Cox, 324 F.2d 167 
( 19 65 ); 

"It follows, as an incident of the constitutional 
separation of powers, that the courts are not to 
interfere with the free exercise of the discretionary 
powers of the attorneys of the United States in their 
control over criminal prosecutions." 

And again in United States v. Cowan , 524 F.2d 504 (1972), 
the Court said; 

"The Fxecutive 7:o)nains i'.lie absolute judge of v/hether 
a prosecution should be initiated and the first and 
presumptively the best judge of whether a pending 
prosecution should be terminated." 

And note the expression of Judge Leventhal in the Barker - 
Martinez case (546 F.2d at 972), quoting in part from the Supreme 
Court's decision in United States v. Dotterweich, 320 U.S. 27J, 285 
(1943): 

"Our system is structured to provide intervention 
points that serve to mitigate the inequitable impact 
of general laws while avoiding the massive step of 
reformulating the law's requirements to meet the 
special facts of one harsh case. Prosecutors can 
choose not to prosecute, for they are expected to 
use their 'good sense. . .conscience and circumspection' 
to ameliorate the hardships of rules of law." 

The FBI officials are being prosecuted for their actions in 
pursuit of the Weatherman fugitives. Through its own statement of 
purpose, the Weather Undergi'ound is a "Marxist-Leninist Communist 
revolutionary group." As defined in its statements and publications, 
the Weather Underground is dedicated to rebellion against the United 
States, with a documented history of anarchistic attacks on American 
industry, law enforcement, and the government itself. The inter- 
national character of the VJeather Underground is amply set out in the 
Report of "The Weather Underground", by the Senate Judiciary Committee 
in January, 1975. Enclosed is a copy of an analysis of the Weather 
Underground prepared by professional security experts in our Society. 
After reviewing these documents, students of terrorism, as well as 
the American public, will have no difficulty classifying the Weatherman 
organization as international as distinguished from a domestic group. 

In fact. Director Webster, in his press conference on December 5th, 
noted that the Weatherman organization is the "closest thing we have 
in the United States to international terrorism." 


Greenberg/Gray-2982 



Greenberg/Gray-2983 



Honorable Griffin B. Bell 
March 15, 1979 
Page Three 

Those alleged violafions by FBI officials occurred during a 
period of national crisis. A President, a Senator, and a civil 
rights leader had been assassinated. An unpopular war was ripping 
the country. The campuses were in an uproar. The V7eatherinan was 
scourging the Nation. Not even the Nation's Capitol was spared — 
the Capitol Building and the Pentagon were bombed by the Weatherman. 
Under this attack on our national security, the FBI responded to the 
desperate urging of the American people and government to contain 
this criminal conspiracy, with techniques long accepted by Congress, 
Attorneys General, and Presidents. 

Perhaps these past officials, as well as the FBI men, were 
mindful of the. following admonition of Tlioinas Jefferson, "A strict 
observance of the written lav^s is doubtless one of the highest duties 
of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, 
of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of 
higher obligation." 

Senator John Glenn, in February, 1979, the anniversary of 
his earth-orbit flight, echoes the sentiments of the FBI officials 
when he stated, "Patriotism has been the main motivation of my entire 
adult life." He said it was time to cease putting down our heroes 
and s tart . support ing America and the things she stands for. 

Assuredly, Gray, Felt, and Miller were dedicated to "saving 
our country when in danger", and were motivated by patriotism with 
no thought of personal gain. 

In addition, they acted in a national crisis of international 
terrorist activity upon the demand of their government superiors. 

At that time, there were no guidelines or directions. In fact, on 
April 20, 1978 -- the very day that Messrs. Gray, Felt, and Miller 
were being arraigned in the Federal Courthouse in Washington, D.C., 
you may recall that you were testifying across town on Capitol Hill 
in regard to future guidelines and a charter pertaining to the 
very same techniques for v/hich these men were being charged. 

I was particularly impressed and encouraged. Judge, by one 
of your replies in that testimony on that day. Senator Kennedy 
asked you whether we would have avoided indicting top echelon people 
if we had clearly defined procedures outlining permissible as well 
as prohibited investigative techniques. Your answer, which emphasized 
one of the basic reasons for this petition to you now, was: 

"Definitely. That has worried me from the very first 
day I became Attorney General. I have wondered about 
this. If our system that we had in place at the time 
was so inadequate that the error could be committed, I 
wonder about it. Negligence could be committed, as 
distinguished from acting with criminal intent . I have 
wondered about that." 



Honorable Griffin B. 
MartJh 15^ 1979 
Page Four 



Recently, the govornment has requested delays in the trial 
due to serious, complications in granting the defense access to 
necessary classified material. The prolonged nature of the investi- 
gation over the past five years and the refusal to provide the 
requested data indicate the uncertainty of the prosecution and also 
attest to national security as the major factor in this case. 

As I stated previously, and as demonstrated by actions in the 
past three years, our Society will neither lessen its resolve nor 
spare its resources in the all-out effort to vindicate our three 
associates. To defend active and former FBI Agents charged with 
violations during the performance of duties in the Weatherman fugitives 
investigation, our members, current FBI Agents and many concerned 
citizens throughout the country have, since 1976, contributed more 
than $800,000 to our Special Agents Legal Fund, Inc. Since the 
inception of the fund, we have expended more than $600,000 for legal 
representation which the Department of Justice refused to provide 
for these men. V7e estimate that legal expenses for the pending Gray- 
Felt-Miller trial - presumably of six weeks' duration - v/ill amount 
to approximately $6,000 per day for a seven-day week, in addition 
to pre-trial costs of about $75,000. Accordingly, we are mounting 
a campaign at this time to collect an additional $250, 000-$300 , 000 . 

In this period of inflation, not even justice comes at low 
cost. Nevertheless, this Society is determined to bring our cause 
to the forum of public opinion and to contend for justice in the 
American judicial system. Recognizing the authority of the Attorney 
General as the prime solution to this dilemma, our first recourse - 
in the name of good conscience, compassion, and common sense - is 
this request to you to dismiss these charges. 

I would sincerely appreciate your personal consideration and 
response to this petition so that I might make your observations 
available to our national membership and make further decisions on 
the course of action by our Society. 

Sincerely yours. 


CHARLES H. STANLEY 
Pres ident 


Enclosure 


Greenberg/Gray- 2984 


i 



Greenberg/Gray- 2985 



OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT 
CHARLES H. STANLEY 


5 BELAIR 

NORTH LITTLE ROCK, ARK.72116 

March 15, 1979 


The President 
The White House 
Washington, D.C. 

Dear Mr. President: 


I am well aware of the current problems involving the welfare 
and security of our great nation and hope and pray for success in 
your courageous endeavors. 


We, as American citizens and former Special Agents of the FBI, 
feel there is a matter developing which also directly affects the 
security of our country - the miscarriage of justice in prosecuting 
L. Patrick Gray, Mark Felt, and Edward Miller for carrying out their 
duties in pursuit of the Weather Underground fugitives then threatening 
our Nation's security. 


As our President, you, more than anyone else, are aware of 
the absolute necessity for maintaining the intelligence capabilities 
of our government at the highest level. The unwarranted attacks on 
the FBI and other intelligence agencies certainly have affected the 
continuing receipt of accurate intelligence data so vital to the 
operations of our government. 

While the indictments of Gray, Felt, and Miller already have 
impaired our intelligence-gathering capabilities, a subsequent trial 
will be even more damaging to our Nation's welfare. 

Realizing your heavy schedule, we still appeal to you to take 
a few moments to review this unjust and security-weakening action, 
after which we are certain you will agree that the trial should not 
take place and the indictment should be dismissed. 


Enclosed is a copy of a letter addressed to the Attorney 
General urging him, as the highest legal officer of our government to 
use his legal authority to dismiss the indictment of Gray, Felt, and 
Miller. 


Thank you for your consideration. 

ALL IHFOMIATIOH COTITAIIIED Most respectfully yours , 

HEEEIl IS lHiJCLlSSIFIED ’ ' 

DATE 03^02-2009 BY 65179 dmli/baw/sbs 


CHARLES H. 
President 


STANLEY 


/' 


Enclosures 

SOCIETY OF FORJMER SPECIAL AGENTS OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, INC. 





L 


J 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 



WASHINGTON, D.C. 20530 


Addreu Reply to the 
DivUktn Indicated 
und Refer to Initials and Number 

FJM:ams 


March 5, 1979 


G 




ALL FBI IlFOPlIATIOl COIITAIHED 

HERE II IS raJCLlSSIFIED 

DATE 03-02™2009 BY 65179 daOi/tiaw/shs 



Brian P. Gettings, Esquire 
1400 N. Uhle Street 
Courthouse Square 
Arlington, Virginia 22216 

(aj . 

Re: United States vj Felt 

Dear Mr. Gettings, 

The government has had an opportunity to review your 
proposed "Stipulation on Policies and Practices" and is 
willing to engage in further discussions to avoid the necessity 
of detailed proof of uncontested facts which v7ould needlessly 
burden the conduct of the trial. There are, however, some 
problems with your proposed "Stipulation on Policies and 
Practices". These problems may be categorized as (a) clear 
misstatements of fact; (b) assertions of fact which the 
government cannot affirmatively agree are true; and (c) 
characterizations of fact which are either not supportably , 

^ec-114 I / / 4 ^ 

or simply inappropriate. Specifically, the follow ing p rg- / 

blems exist with regard to your proposed stipulation. 

*1 JUN 12 1979 

(1) The Brownell memo - You characterize the IVsT (not" 
1955) memorandum from Attorney General Brownell as delegating 
to the FBI authority to engage in surreptitious entry for 


53JUN131979 


Gr^nl^^^ra^-2^6 



2 




electronic and non-electronic purposes. (1(2,3,7,17,23,26) 

This is not the case. In early 1954, the Supreme Court, in 
Irvine v. California 347 U.S. 128 (1954). held that evidence 
obtained from a trespassory microphone placed in a bedroom 
was admissable in state court criminal proceedings. In the 
wake of that decision. Department of Justice policy with 
respect to microphone surveillances was re-evaluated. Attorney 
General Brovmell then issued his May 20, 1954 directive autho- 
rizing the FBI to use microphone surveillances, including 
microphones that required trespass for installation. This 
authorization continued in effect until 1965, when Attorney 
General Katzenbach directed that all microphone surveillances 
be limited to cases involving the national security and that 
each microphone surveillance was to be authorized by the 
Attorney General. Also, you characterize the Brownell memo 
as dealing with "electronic surveillance”-- this is over 
inclusive. Procedures regarding electronic surveillance in 
the form of wiretapping have been governed by President 
Roosevelt's 1940 directive to Attorney General Jackson stating 
that wiretapping could be used "in such cases as you may 
approve, after investigation of the need in each case". This 
practice of Attorney General authorization for FBI wiretapping 
has remained in effect for nearly forty years. Finally, your 
characterizations of the Brownell memo as delegating authority 
to engage in non-electronic surreptitious entries, i.e., bag 


Greenberg/Gray-2987 



3 


jobs, is totally false. 

(2) Tenure of Attorney General Kennedy - As you are no 
doubt aware, Senator Robert Kennedy, at various times, denied 
that he ever knew of FBI microphone surveillances when he 
was Attorney General. There are various FBI documents that 
would support your assertions (115) that Attorney General 
Kennedy was aware of and encouraged the use of microphone 
surveillances in organized crime cases. Contrary to your 
assertion, these same FBI documents indicate Attorney General 
Kennedy's view that such microphone surveillances were "all 
illegal". 

(3) Tenure of Attorney General Katzenbach - Certain of 

your assertions concerning Attorney General Katzenbach would 
appear to be in error. Attorney General Katzenbach was ‘ 

clearly aware of FBI electronic surveillance in the form of 
wiretapping--he , of course, gave written case by case approval 
for such wiretapping. It is also clear that he was aware 

of FBI microphone surveillances, including microphone sur- 
veillances involving trespass, by surreptitious entry or 
otherwise. In July 1965, all microphone surveillances were 
discontinued at the direction of Attorney General Katzenbach. 

In September 1965, microphone surveillances involving trespass, 
in national security cases only, were -reinstituted pursuant 
to case by case authorization by the Attorney General. The 


Greenberg/Gray-2988 



government is unaware of "more than 100" after-the fact 
authorizations of microphone surveillances (16). As noted 
above, the Attorney General has authorized specific wiretaps 
for forty years. Also, the Brownell memo never authorized 
non-electronic surreptitious entries. (117) 

(4) Tenure of Attorney General Ramsey Clark - Your 
assertion that Attorney General Clark became aware of micro- 
phone surveillances and authorized the Department of Justice 
to defend civil suits arising out of those microphone sur- 
veillances (1[9) is essentially correct. However, the impli- 
cation that this included non-electronic "warrantless surrep- 
titious entries", i.e., bag jobs, is false. The Department 

of Justice has never defended the legality of a bag job, i.e., 
a warrantless surreptitious entry and physical search of a 
premises. Also, your assertion that no Attorney General has 
ever advised the Director that the FBI may not engage in 
warrantless surreptitious entries (1126) is misleading to 
the extent that in June 1967 Attorney General Clark speci- 
fically refused to authorize a surreptitious entry and search 
in connection with the foreign intelligence- gathering program 
referred to in your 1110. 

(5) Foreign Intelligence Gathering Program (1110) - Your 
description of the foreign intelligence-gathering program 
(1[10) is somewhat misleading in that it fails to note that 


Greenberg/Gray-2989 



5 


almost all surreptitious entries were directed at premises 
occupied by aliens. Your recent assertion that "satellite" 
entries were targeted against American citizens may be accurate, 
based on information available to you. Government counsel are 
presently unaware of any such entries , and appropriate files 
are being reviewed to determine whether such entries occurred. 
The government does not. dispute the bona fides of your 
assertions and would be willing to consider a stipulation which 
would put these "satellite" entries into an appropriate 
perspective. The government does not dispute that Presidents 
and Attorneys General were aware of this program- -although 
Bureau records may reflect that not all Presidents and 
Attorneys General knew of it. The government does not dispute 
that no President or Attorney General ever authorized any of 
these entries , but notes that the only time such specific 
authorization was sought- -from Attorney General Clark- -it was 
denied. 

(6) Klan and other bag jobs - The government agrees that 
the Bureau conducted bag jobs directed at the Ku Klux Klan 
(11 11) but is unaware of any evidence that would support your 
apparent implication that these bag jobs in any way led to 
the arrest and conviction of the murderers of civil rights 
works in Mississippi. The government is not able to stipulate 
that Attorneys General were aware of any such bag jobs, 
although they may have been aware of wiretapping (specifically) 

and microphone surveillances (generally) . The government is 

Greenberg/Gray-2990 



Greenberg/Gray- 2991 



- 6 - 


not aware of any electronic surveillance or surreptitious 
entries (electronic or bag job) directed at the Minutemen 
( 1111 ). 

(7) Hoover cut off - Certain aspects of your description 
of the Hoover cut off on bag jobs are in error. The cut off 
was formally communicated to the field with respect to the 
program described in your 1110. This was necessary because 
the field was authorized to conduct surveys (entries) in 
connection with that program, and formal instructions to 
cease such surveys were needed (see discovery item 81A & 81B) . 
This was not the case with other bag jobs, which required 
headquarters approval--and certainly appropriate Domestic 
Intelligence Division officials were aware of the cut off. 

The characterization of Mr. Hoover's cut off on bag jobs as 

an "opinion" is misleading. It was--in the clearest possible 
terms--a directive. Also, the statement that in cutting off 
bag jobs Mr. Hoover "was specifically referring" to the pro- 
gram referred to in your 1(10 is not supported by the evidence. 

(8) John Kearney bag jobs (1113) - In the spring of 1968, 
New York supervisor John Kearney conducted five bag jobs, all 
with approval from FBI headquarters . Any stipulation should 
note that these bag jobs did not relate to SDS or Weatherman. 
The proposition that Kearney was advised that "the Hoover "ban* 
...did not apply to 'his kind of cases'" is somewhat at 
variance with the information available to the government. 

It may be helpful to explore your basis for this assertion. 



Greenberg/Gray- 2992 




- 7 - 

(9) Title III - Your assertion that Title III "left 
open" the issue of the power of the President (not the exe- 
cutive branch) to authorize warrantless electronic surveil- 
lance in national security cases (1[14) would be better ex- 
pressed in the terms of the Supreme Court in Keith — that Title 
III was "neutral" on the subject of the President's powers 

to authorize warrantless electronic surveillance in National 
Security matters. Your assertion that the FBI, with the 
knowledge of the Justice Department, conducted surreptitious 
entries (feasibility surveys) prior to seeking Departmental, 
and thereafter judicial, authorization, pursuant to Title 
III, for microphone surveillances is not supported by any 
evidence known to the government. 

(10) Your 1116 - The assertion that prior to Keith 
(June 19, 1972) the Attorney General authorized electronic 
surveillance in national security cases without distinction 
as to whether the case was foreign or domestic is accurate 
to a point. The documents presented by the FBI to the 
Attorney General in each case clearly noted whether the justi- 
fication was predicated on considerations of internal security 
(domestic) or foreign intelligence. This distinction was 
always clearly made in affidavits filed by the Attorney 
General in connection with Alderman hearings. 

(11) Huston Plan - Your description of the Huston Plan 
(HIS) is essentially accurate but the government cannot agree 
that Director Hoover's opposition to the program discussed in 



your 1[10 was "for solely practical reasons" or that those 
same reasons prompted President Nixon to withdraw the Huston 
Plan. It is clear that unsuccessful efforts were made in the 
winter of 1970-71 to revive the Huston Plan (1(21). Hov/ever, 
the government has no evidence that these efforts failed 
solely (as you imply) because of Director Hoover's opposition 
to the program discussed in your 1(10. 

(12) Your tl9 - This paragraph mixes two separate events. 
The first is an August 1970 incident when, after talking to 
President Nixon, Director Hoover ordered increased informant 
coverage in connection with fears of possible terrorist kid- 
nappings of diplomats. The second is an April 1971 incident 
when, after talking to President Nixon, Director Hoover 
ordered a "no holds barred" investigation of a multiple 
police killing in New York (not involving the Weatherman) . 

It should be noted that several technical barriers did exist 
to such an investigation since the FBI had no jurisdiction 
to investigate these murders. The government, of course, 
would stipulate to an accurate statement with respect to 
these two incidents. 

(13) Weatherman bag jobs - The government will stipulate 
that Weatherman bag jobs began in August 1970 and continued 
until at least 1974. The government will not stipulate that 
these bag jobs were conducted "as a result of a direction from 


Greenberg/Gray-2993 



Greenberg/Gray- 2994 



Mr. Hoover”. (1120) 

(14) Disclosure of bag jobs to Attorney General - It 
is clear that the Department of Justice, after Mr. Felt's 
retirement in 1973, was made aware of surreptitious entries-- 
electronic and non-electronic-^-by the FBI. (1[25) For exanple, 

the Special Prosecutor was apprised, by Mr. Gray, of the Arab 
terrorist bag job. With this one exception the Special 
Prosecutor was not apprised of any other FBI bag jobs. Also, 
the so-called Ruckelshause inquiry- -which continued after he 
resigned- -did not result in the Department being apprised of 
FBI bag jobs. You, of course, have been apprised in discovery 
of other disclosures by the FBI to Department of FBI bag jobs, 
including the disclosures that prompted the investigation 
that uncovered the bag jobs alleged in the present indictment. 
The government would again, of course, be willing to stipulate 
to any reasonable recitation of these facts. Your 1(25, 
however, states that after Mr. Felt's retirem.ent Attorneys 
General were advised that the Director of the FBI on occasion 
specifically authorized the use of warrantless surreptitious 
entry. This is correct to the extent that Attorneys General 
were advised that such activities occurred in the past. It 
is in error to the extent that it implies that Attorneys 
General learned of this practice and permited it to continue. 

(15) Minor Inaccuracies - There are a nxamber of relatively 
minor additional inaccuracies in your proposed stipulation. 

The meeting with President Eisenhower's cabinet occurred in 



10 


1956 (not 1955) and covered a wide range of topics, including 
those mention in your 11. There was obviously use of 
warrantless microphones surveillances involving trespass 
during the tenure of Attorney General Rogers. Data available 
to government counsel would not warrant your characterization (14) 
that this constituted a "massive program". You are correct 
that in 1965 President Johnson banned electronic surveillance 
in all cases not involving national security (18). However, 
your characterization of President Johnson's motivations as 
relating to the Bobby Baker case is speculative and will not 
be stipulated to by the government. Your discussion of the 
CIA mail opening program (124), in order to be fully accurate, 
must state that this program involved international mail 
and not domestic mail. As you are aware, search and seizure 
law regarding border searches stands on a different footing 
from search and seizure law in a fully intra-United States 
situation. See United States v. 12,200 Ft. Reels of Film , 

413 U.S. 123 (1972); Almeida- Sanchez v. United States , 413 
U.S. 266 (1973); United States v, Martinez-Fuerte , 428 U.S. 

543 (1976); and similar cases. Also the declination of pro- 
secution on the CIA mail opening case was in January 1977 
(not in 1976) . Finally, the first Departmental guidelines 
relating to warrantless surreptitious entries involving 
electronic only , were promulgated by the Justice Department 
in 1974 (not 1976) (127). These guidelines (1974 and 1976) 


Greenberg/Gray-2995 




11 


do not permit bag jobs. 

Although it appears that your proposed stipulation con- 
tains a number of errors, some of major magnitude, it is 
believed that these errors were made in good faith and that you 
would be willing to correct them. As to areas where the 
government cannot confirm information we would be willing to 
do so if you can provide us with hard evidence and/or direct 
us to Bureau files that would corroborate these assertions. 

As noted in several cases above, your proposed stipulation 
contains various characterization, perhaps best described 
as editorializations , that are simply inappropriate in any 
stipulation. Finally, for obvious advocacy reasons, your 
stipulation centers almost exclusively on policies concerning 
microphone surveillances involving trespass--whether by 
surreptitious entry or otherwise- -and continually blurs 
the major distinctions between such activities and surreptitious 
physical searches of a premises, i.e., bag jobs such as those 
involved in this case. 

In conclusion, the government believes that there is 
room for further negotiation that could result in a mutually 
acceptable stipulation as to a number of matters you have 
raised. In addition, there may be some additional facts 
that the government would propose as stipulations. In any 


Greenberg/Gray-2996 



event, our negotiations with respect to possible stipulations 
will be helpful to all parties in hopefully eliminating 
from trial detailed and extended proof of matters that can 
be presented to the jury in cogent and effective form by 
stipulation or other suitable methods. As you have acknow- 
ledged, government (or defense) stipulations as to certain 
facts represent agreements as to accuracy only and do not 
in any way concede the trial admissability of those facts. 
Please advise me of any suggestions you may have concerning 
the resolution of the present disagreements between us, as 
detailed above, concerning the accuracy of certain aspects of 
your proposed stipulation. 

Sin cerely , 

Francis J. Martin 
Trial Attornfey 
Criminal Division 


cc: Chief Judge Bryant 

Alan I. Baron, Esquire 
Thomas A. Kennelly, Esquire 


Greenberg/Gray-2997 



OPTlONAL.rORM NO. 10 
JULY 1*73 EDITION 
GSA'FPMR (41 CFR) 101.11.6 


UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT 

Memorandum 


TO : 

FROM : 

subject: 

o 


FJaxERAi aOVEEMBNlJ 


Paul V. 

of In v p g a t i on 

Francis J. Mart 
Criminal Divisio' 

Los Angeles Informant 




‘ 


ALL FBI IMFOEIIATIOIJ COllTAIHED 

HEKEIl IS DIiJCLASSIFIED 

DATE 03-03-2009 BY 65179 dmli/baw/sbs 


As you are aware, CKi e F‘ J uSg e "'Br y an t ruled on- February 

/ ^ 

22, at an ^ camera hearing that My. Gray, in his efforts., 
to distinguish the | [ entry from the Weatherman entries 

will not be precluded from stating that he authorized the 


entry on the basis of hard information that there would 


be an inininent* terrorist attack in this country similar to 


the Munich massacre. Judge Bryant specifically ruled that 

f 

he would not preclude Mr. Gray from stating that part' of 
his "hard information" included information that this 
terrorist attack would be 



b6 

b7C 

b7D 


The information, in fact, was that 


mnziEXEiamT 


zim 


* — 

41 MAR-a©.1979 


It has been the prosecutions understanding, ab~initio. 


that this information--^ 


k- could 


not be publicly revealed because to do so would compromise 
the Los Angeles informant 'who provided the in£o,rmation , in- 



:b7D 




53 j 0 n "131979 


Buy U.S. Savings Bonds B,eg!3l6^^V%iQtal^'lBS8ivings Plan 



-.2 


eluding likely physical reprisal. Due to the grave impact 
that refusal to permit public disclosure of this information 
will have, i.e., certain dismissal of the prosecution of Mr. 
Gray, it is of obvious importance that all facts and circum- 
stances surrounding this situation be examined in the closest 
possible detail. 


As I understand the situation based on our various 
discussions, the Los Angeles informant and| 


met in 


with 


and discussed 
It is unclear to me whether any actual 

took place. However, my 


clear understanding is that ultimately nothing substantive 
came of the meeting and that later planned terrorist attacks 
were totally unrelated. As I understand it, the sensitivity 
of the informafi'on derives from the assertion that if the 
information is revealed,! 


will immediately know 


that the Los Angeles informant was the source. There are, 
of course, alternatives to this -■ 


or their associates could have been an informant 
or could have been the subject of a technical surveillance. 
This is not to underestimate the possible danger of public 
disclosure to the Los Angeles informant, but merely to 
suggest that the greater the number of possible, if not 
actual, sources the less the likelihood that the Los Angeles 
informant would be pinpointed as the source. 


Greenberg/Gray-2999 


b6 

b7C 

b7D 





In the intervening years it is quite possible that the danger^ 


of compromise, and of reprisals, that were very real in 1972 


be 

b7C 

:b7D 


may have diminished considerably. Accordingly the Bureau 


should conduct the following investigation with respect to 



(1) Determine his present whereabouts and general 
background information, 

(2) Determine whether he is presently associated 
with any organized violent radical elements, i.e.^ whether 
he is presently in a position to effect any reprisal or 
is even likely to be cognizant of events such as the 
Gray trial that would prompt him to make the connection 
with the L.A. informant. 


(3) Determine whether he is presently disaffected 
from organized radical groups, in particular whether 
he believes that "everyone" was an informant and thus 
would be less likely to single out the L.A. informant. 


(4) Gather any additional data concerning 

that you believe may be pertinent to deter- 
mining the likelihood that public disclosure of the 

would jeopardize the L.A. 

informant. In setting forth the above requests it is 


be 

b7C 

:b7D 


realized that it may be difficult to gather certain of 



Greenberg/Gray-3000 



renewed interest in him. However, in view of the 
importance of this matter, every feasible effort should 
be made to develop^ ^ full current profile on 


be 

:b7C 


With respect to the L.A. informant, the Bureau should 
locate the informant and arrange to interview him. .You 
should arrange to participate personally in the interview. 
The interview should cover all aspects of the I 


and the informants dealings with 
and other militants thereafter. You should developQ any 
information that could possibly bear on the likelihood that 

could identify the source--and be a serious threat 

were revealed. 


to the source- -if the 


b6 

b7C 

b7D 


Finally, all Bureau information concerning the cir- 
cumstances of the original 


should 


be reviewed to determine the possibility of plausible attri- 
bution of the information to sources other than the L.A. 
informant. While in a matter of this importance it would 
be inappropriate to set a fixed date for completion of 
your investigation, you should obviously proceed with all 
deliberate speed. 


b7D 


T 


Greenberg/Gray-3001 



6-93 (Re^., 4 - 26 - 78 vK 

■1 79 "K 

-i. w fc- -p * — 

PAGE 1 OF ^ 

DATE 

3/t3/7T 


DEPARTAAENT OE JUSTICE 
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 
COMMUNICATION MESSAGE FORM 


CLASSIFICATION 

UNCLAS 


PRECEDENCE 

PRIORITY 


^F$HIPP LAIDE HQ HD13S DbS^HIVUiEP DbSPgTZ flAR 7T 

START HERE 

FH DIRECTOR FBI 


/RM rii I vp; rp i 

to_T0 FBI LOS ANGELES 


ALL lUFOPmXIOl COICTAIIED 

HEPIIH IS UIICL13SIFIED 

DATE 03™02™200.9 BY 65179 dmli/baw/sbs 


uLUNCLAS 

• U. s. vs . /gray 


12_RE YOUR TELETYPES 1/iy AND a/E7/7T-. CAPTIONED| | b7D 

-■CF0RNER3-. 

10- THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE-. IN CONNECTION WITH CAPTIONED 
-MATTER-. HAS REQUESTED lilE LOCATE AND INTERVIEIi) | ^ AND 

8-conduct certain investigation concerning 

- | | . IN VIEW OF THE DEPARTMENT'S REQUEST-. YOU ARE TO EXPEDI- 

•^-TIOUSLY ASCERTAIN THE CURRENT WHERE ABOUTS OFI |AS DELL 

-lAsI I THIS INVESTIGATION SHOULD BE AS DISCREET AS 

J ^ ^ 

^“POSSIBLE- ADVISE FBI HEADflUARTERS AS SOON AS BOTH INDIVIDUALS 
“ARE LOCATED-. AT WHICH POINT ARRANGEMENTS WILL BE MADE FOR 
^“INTERVIEW OfI I- — 


DO NOT TYPS mSSSAGi BSLOW TKIIS LINE 


APPROVED BY 


DRAFTED BY 

PVD:DMD {fil 


1 - 

MR. 

ADAMS 

1 - 

MR. 

MOORE 

1 - 

MR. 

MCDERMOTT 

1 - 

MR. 

MINTZ 

1 - 

MR. 

STEEL 

. 1 - 

MR. 

DALY 

1 

MR. 

BASSETT 



1 


Greenberg/Gray-3002 


>ATE ROOM 

3/b/77 baaa 


liEC-114 



rtucrini- 

COMWilj^rftTinNS^TlpN 

MAR 06 1979 

DO NOT FILE^WITHOUT COMMUNICATIONS ST A 


TELE EXT. 

35H2 







DO NOT TYjPE PAST ^DS UNE 


0'93A (7-19-77) 



OgPAKTA/lEMy OF JUSTICE 
FEDERAL BUI2E AU OF IWVEST8GATCON 
COAAAAUNIICATION MESSAGE FOKM . 



Greenberg/Gray-3003 


FBf/DOJ 




":b2 
'■ be ‘ 
;'b7C .■ 
■ \hlD ■ 


\NOTE ^ BY %:{10 KARCH 5n ; 1^7% FRANCIS ‘ j- ' HARTlN TO P , / ' 

!ac |ERE RE^WSTE» TO , LOCATE SOURGE AS^MELL AS | | b 

~| - j r yAS::^FORnERLY- a SliB JECKOF. A : : 

BOMESTIC SECURITY/INVEStiGATIOr-J-. LA TELETYPE S/27/7'^- , ABVIS£| - 
; EURRCWT feJHEREABGLlTS' SAS UWKKOyf;!. . THEY PREVIOUSLY iBViSEB. BY^^b 
THEIR TEtETYPE l/W?'!-, THAT: THE UHEREABOUTi of | | . ^ 

HAS UNKNOUW. - -UHILE HARTlN’ S’ REQUEST ASKEB FOR HO RE ■ lUFOR- 
HATIOH THAU jHE; HilRE- LOCATIob f HESE IMBIVIBtiALS; IT IS \ : 

‘BELIEVEB UE;SH0ULB FIRST. LOGATE THE' jMBIVIBUALS PRIOR TO ; 
ISSUING AUY FURTHER IS UELI^ ABVANTAGEbUS 

THAT SOURCE , BE iNTERVIEUEB iT AGEHT . UHO: HAMBLEB SOURCE IN PAST * 


IN CONJUNCTION bJITH A BEPARTNENTAL ATTORf4EY. THE ABVANTAGE' .. 
IS IT ALLbUS nARTlN to' HAKE HIS ' 0 N-THEtSPOT V ASSESSnENT: OF THIS 

iiatteR anb. There can be no auESTiON As to the cREBiBiLiTY-oF a: 

AMBTHE : 


BUREAU CONTACT MITH THE SOURCE. SINCE 
SOURCE HAVE HAS A CLOSE RELATIONSHIP IN THE PAST-. IT ■WOULB 
APPEAR LIKELY THE SOURCE Bt IN A POSITION TO- FURNISH 
INFO RN AT ION CON GERHIN G 


CURRENT A Cf |;V I TI IS ; 


ANB THE ANSWERS: TO OTHER ;(3UESTIONS .HARTIM ASKEB IN, HIS ilENOR-. 


AMBON . 


b J^PPROVI 

• ■ ■ ,, 

< Director 
. " Assoc, dir 
Dep. AO Acii 
7 iDsp. AD Inyj 



^ :Legaf Court, 

J . Plan. & insp.' 
Rec. Mgnt 
- Tech. Servs7“ 

.Training 

Public Alfird^ 



, Greenberg/Gray-3004 , 



ro 


OPTIONAU FORM NO. 10 

JUUY 1973 EDITION 

GSA FPMR (41 CFRI 101-11.6 


UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT 




Mem 


Paul Dal 



ndum 

YSSmUL &0VEfi»MEN5 


PROM : Frank Mart , 
^<v>r c/c ^«sr/c 



o 


subject: United States v. L. Patrick Gray, 


AtL FBI IIIF|J|ilTIOn COITTAIlED 

HEREIN 13 Ii!Br133IFIED 

DATE 03-03-2009 BY 65179 DHH/BAN/SBS 


date: March 12, 1979 


et al 


s.«r 

j 


Enclosed is an inventory and a package of FBI documents 
which were exhibits in grand jury proceedings. Frank Dunham 
has requested copies of these documents. Please process 
the documents for eventual transmittal to defense counsel 



GreenbeFg/Gray-3005 


C 3--/ / f 0 



S 1 JUN IS 1979 





5010*1 10 


lU 1 ^ U.S. Savings Bonds Btgftlar^ on the Payroll Savings Plan 



ALL IHFOm-IATIOir COtlTAII'IED 

HEKEIH X^^TjftgCLASSIFIED 

DATE 03-(jl-20Cni' BY 65179 dmli/Daw/s 


RECORDS MANAGEMENT DIVISION 


Atipached 
advises |_ 


Los An geles teletype 



(former) w, 


s 


contacted by Bureau Agents and4* advised 
if informatio n he furnished reQ-ai^ ding 
activities of I 


7 


were disclosed, his identity would 
be compromised. The source stated 
the disclosure of his identity 
through disclosure of the 
information would place he and his 
family in physical danger, 

A copy of the teletype was 
furnished to Barnet D, Skolnik and 
Francis; J, ^Martin of the Department. 
Martin '-remarked ‘that from the 
content of the 't'^letype the 
interview was conducted in 
accordance wi-th &s instr uctions , 
(Martin «c 6nfe'rred;^with SA I I 

I I ron |/12/gj9 and furnished 


b2 

b6 

b7C 

b7D 


b6 

:b7C 


instructipns ras to how he .wan ted 
the interview conducted.) SA [ 


was accompanied by ASAC Joseph V, 
Cor less. 


] 


Martin requested Sa[ 


return to FBIHQ so ’ that he; might 
confer with him regarding source. 
This has been arranged. 


be 

b7C 


1 - 
1 - 

1 - 


Mr. Adams 

1 - Mr. 

Bassett 

Mr . McDermott 

1 - Mr. 

Steel 

Mr . Moore 

1 - Mr. 

Daly 

Mr . Mintz — - . 

APPROVED:r. . . Ul Sorv. 

Legaf Coun. 


fCAieclor 
O 

Dep AD A 

Greenberg/Gra^-30©&> 


IP* 



Rsc. Mgnt. 
Tech. Servs; 


T raming 


Pubiic Affs. Off. 



\ % 



LAOS 74 dli23'^5Z 
00 HO 

DE LA #1 ' 

.,0 14 2005Z mar 9 



JHaR?9 20 Uz 

RSC£iV;-D 
A'EQEI-.aL iUlREAU 

/F_i'fi'VEL'ribAMQ)^ 
ClJMliUl-’iCATIOfiS SECT! ON 


FM LOS aMGStES 
TO DIREC/OR IMriEDI ATE 
BT 

AT/sV; SUPV. PAU!- DALEY (HAND CARRY), ROOM 6S8B JEH BlJ ILD I NG 


DlCLiLSSIFICATIOH AUTHOaiTY DERIYIID FROH: 
FBI i-JJTOlUlTIC D I GLASS I FI CAT I OH GUIDE 
DATE 03-0Z-Z00S 


Dep.AOAdm. 
Dep, ADInv. ' 
Asst; 01r.:_ ™ 
Adm. S§rv* “ 
Grim. Inv. 

Idfint, 

Jnteil. 


Laboratory 
Legal Coun. 

Rec. Mgnt. 


Tech. ServSr^ 
Tfeining 

PiibBc^^oSr 

Jetepf^ne Rm. “ 
O^rtBtor's Sec'y 





U.S. vs GRAY, ET AL . 

30 UR CE , 


WAS contacted ON MARCH 15, 


1979 at 3;40 P.M. BY ASAC JOSEPH V. CORLESS OF THE LOS ANGELES 

OF THE BOSTON DIVISION, AMD 


DIVISION AND SA 


PROVIDED WITH THE OFFICIAL IDENTITY OF THE INTERVIEWING AGENTS. 
SOURCE WAS advised THAT INTERVIEWING AGENTS WISHED TO DISCUSS 
WITH HIM information HE HAD FURNISHED TO SA 

IrELATIMG TO 


IN 



IN RESPONSE TO 

QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE ABOVE, SOURCE VOLUNTARILY PROVIDED THE 
FOLLOWING; 



be 

:b 7 C 


APPROVED: 

Director 


Adm. Serv. 
Grim. inv. 


|Greenberg/Gray-3007 

5i?JUN 131979 


A ” 50 "%' -^dent. 

Dcp.AOadm^^f'^"- 
Dep. AD Inv. Laboi 


Laboratory 


Legal Coun.^ 
Pfan. & fnspr 
Rec. Mgnt. 
Tech. ServsY 
Training 


3 k: 


pobiic AfTs, Q^/. 





Pa.GE TWO (LA) SE: 



. HOWEVER, HE DID RECALL THAT UPON 


RECEIPT OF THIS INFORMAT lOW, HE .IMMEDIATELY FURNISHED IT TO 



PROVIDED SOURCF WITH THIS INFOR 


M A T 1 0 N . HO W E VER , H E B EL I E VE D 



WHICH HE COULD NOT RECALL 


AMD AN UNKNOWN REPRESENTATIVE 


. SOURCE ADDITIONALLY 


STATED HE COllD NOT REMEMBER IF HE WAS TOLD ANYONE ELSE WAS AT 


. BUT STATED 


'TH ER E CO LL D HA VE 5 FE N MORE , ' 


SOURCE STATED HE DID NOT KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLEj | 

IhaD DISCUSSED THIS PLAN WITH PRIOR TO SOURCE'S HEARIN 


about it, but EXPRESSED OPINION THAT HE MUST HAVE DISCUSSED 
IT WITH SOMEONE WHO WAS NOT SUPPOSED TO KNOW 



ADDITIONALLY STATED THAT AS FAR AS HE KNOWS, 


Greenberg/Gray-3008 







page three (LA) 


WOT DISCUSS THE FLAN WITH ANYONE OTHER THAN 


IN CONNECTION WITH 


SO URGE 


stated he did mot know where 


MOR HIS IDENTITY. HE DID SPECULATE, HOWEVER, THAT 


b6 

b7C 

b7D 


REg 


W IT H 


IT WAS SOURCE'S UNDERSTANDING, BASED OM CONVERSATIONS 
THAT 


KNOW WHO 


HAD TOLD, HOW MANY PEOPLE 


SOURCE DID WOT 

' I HAD TOLD, RUT 


SOURCE POINTED OUT THAT IT "COULD HAVE BEEN JUST OWE PERSON. 
WHO SHOULD MOT HAVE KNOWN ABOUT' THE PLAN." SOURCE STATED 
that all THE INFORMATION HE GATHERED RELATING TO THIS INCIDENT 
WAS INFORMATION FURNISHED DIRECTLY TO HIM By| 

AND MO ONE ELSE. 


b6 

b7C 

b7D 


SOURCE STATED THAT HE COULD NOT PECALL IF 

OR IF IT WAS 


b7D 


Greenberg/Gray-3009 




QUERIED AS TO WHETHER OP HOT PUBLIC DISaOSURE OF 
TH F ABO VE I N FO R MAT 1 0 U WO UL D F UT . SO UR CE OR AMY ME ER OF HIS 
family IM jeopardy, he REPLIED, "IT WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO 
ME." WHEN ASKED IF IT WOULD PUT SOURCE AND HIS FAMILY IN 
PHYSICAL danger, HE SAID, "SHIT', YEAH." HE WAS THEN ASKED IF 
ONLY A PORTION OF THIS INFORMATION WAS MADE PIBLIC, AGAIN 
WITHOUT IDENTIFYING KIM, WHICH COULD HAVE COME FROM OTH'^R 

:b7^ 

SOURCES OTHER THAN HIMSELF, WOULD HE STILL 3E IN JEOPARDY? 

IN REPLYING TO THIS SOURCE STATED, "IT COULD COME BACK TO ME 
EASILY IF SOMEONE WANTED TO PUT TWO AND TWO TOGETHER." HE 



Greenberg/Gray-3010 



P-iGE FIVE CL A) 


REeVIRE THAT I BE EXECUTED” AND HE FELT "THISyOULD HAPP'^N 


SOURCE REMINDED SA 


THAT UFO 13 INITIAL CONTACT BY 


THE FBI IT WAS AGREED THAT HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE FBI WOULD 
remain CONFIDENTIAL IN THAT HIS LIFE AMD THAT OF HIS FAMILY 
WOULD BE IN JEOPARDY IF RELATIONSHIP REVEALED. SOURCE STAT'^D 
HIS FEELINGS WERE STILL THE SAME AND "MOTHING IS CHANGED." HE 
RE-EMPHASIZED THAT DISCLOSURE OF THE ABOVE INFORMATION OOULD 
REVEAL HIS IDENTITY AS THE SOURCE. 

SOURCE WAS THEN ASKED IF HE FELT A SIMPLE STATEMENT 
appearing in PUBLIC TO THE EFFECT THAT I I 


WOULD 


EE DETRIMENTAL- TO HIM. SO UR CE REFL lED , 1 


." WHEN ASKED TO 


FURTHER EXPLAIN SOURCE STATED THAT 


SOURCE WENT ON TO SAY THAT 


FOUND OUT, HE'D KILL ME 


PAGE SIX (LA) SEC>^T 


I NT E R V I EW CO N CL UD ED AT 4 ; 2 0 F . M . A ND UPO N EX I T I NG 


RESIDENCE, SOURCE STATED TO SA 


’IT'S A GOOD THING 


YOU came BECAUSE I WON’T TALK TO ANYONE ELSE." 

IT IS NOTEWORTHY THAT AT NO TIME DURING THIS INTERVIEW 


WAS A^3Y MENTION MADE OF THE GRAY, MILLER, FELT TRIAL. 


Greenberg/Gray-3011 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 




WASHINGTON, D.C. 20530 


Address Reply to the 
DiTision Indies ted 


and Refer to Initials and Number 

BDS : ams 


March 15, 1979 


Honorable Uilliam B. Bryant 
Chief Judge 

U.S. District Court for the 
District of Columbia 
U.S. Courthouse 

3rd & Constitution Avenue, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20001 


ALL FBI IlIFORMATIOH COUTAIHED 

HEREIH IS UNCLASSIFIED 

DATE 03-02-2009 BY 65179 dufl-i/lDaw/sl); 


Re : United States v. Cray, et al 


Dear Judge Bryant , 




As the government has stated previously, certain of the 
Court's recent rulings, which would allov; defendant Gray at 
trial to make public certain data which the Court has, over 
the government's objection, found to be relevant to the core 
evidentiary disputes in the case, have now put the case 
against defendant Gray in a posture different from that of 
the case against defendants Felt and Miller. Accordingly, 

®.ii4 Ai-W ^oVT" /vy 

we earlier advised the Court that it^vras highly Drahaplg / 



that severance of defendant Gray would be necessa 


JUN 12' 1979 


The issue of possible severance of, defendant Gray has 
now been fully reviewed vjithin the Department of Justice and 
a final determination has nov7 been reached that, in the 
government's judgment, such a severance is nov; required in 
the interests of justice. VJhile the Department of Justice is 


53 JUN 131979 


Greenberg/Gray-3012 



actively pursuing both the factual inquiries and ultimate 
policy determinations that are required by the Court's recent 
rulings, it is clear that the resolutions which the government 
is likely ultimately to propose to the Court would be more 
fair in the context of a trial of defendant Gray alone than in 
the context of a joint trial. Accordingly, we suggest that 
the Court now reconsider and grant, in light of the Court's 
recent rulings, defendant Gray ' s ^earlier motion for severance. 

With respect to trial of defendants Felt and Miller, we 
will continue to work as expeditiously as possible to com- 
plete the pre-trial matters required by the Court's recent 
ruling as to the availability to them of a Barker -Martinez 
defense. Our objective is to proceed to trial of defendants 
Felt and Miller at the earliest possible date, with trial of 
defendant Gray to be scheduled thereafter. 

Sincerely , 

Barnet D. Skolnik 

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney 

for the District of Columbia 

cc : Alan I. Baron, Esquire 

Brian P. Gettings, Esquire 
Thomas A. Kennel ly, Esquire 


J 


Greenberg/Gray-3013 



UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT 

Memorandum 


TO 


FROM 


Mr. Bassettt 


P. V. Daly, 


T 


UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 


date: 3/19/79 


O '^1 

subject: united STATES v. GRAY ET AL 


f r 




Asst. Dir.: 
Adm. Servs. . 
Cfim. Inv. _ 

Ident. 

Intell. 

Laboratory _ 


Legal Coun. 
Plan. & In 
Rec. Mgnt. 

Tech. Servs. 

Training 

Public Affs. Ofl. . 

Telephone Rm. 

Director’s Sec’y _ 




PURPOSE: 


The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize 
the status of this matter as it relates' to discovery. 


SYNOPSIS: 


Chief Judge William Bryant ordered the Government 
to complete discovery in this matter by 3/30/79 during 
open court hearing on 3/15/79. With the exception of 
foreign government materials , the discovery as to FBI 
materials will be completed by that time. Alternative 
methods of furnishing the foreign government material being 
considered. The probleni presented by the Los Angeles 
source has not been resolved. 



RECOMMENDATION : 


t.it 

t r- 


That on completion of discovery, we submijt: a \ 
memorandum, in writing, to the Department stating that fact 
along with our understandings as to the Department .!..s . 

instructions concerning discovery. 


ALL IliFFOEHATION COHTAIHED ■ 

HEPEIH IS OTCLA3SIFIED 

DATE 03-02-2009 BY 65179 dmli/baw/sbs 




APPROVED! 


Director 


iSSOC. Dii 


. AD mm, 
f/^Dep;ADInv. 




1 Mr. Adams 
I-'- Mr. McDermott 
1 Mr. cregar 
1 - Mr. Mintz 

?VD : j am..Ji)L('i'C) 

(9) g 

Greenberg/Gray-3014 


LegalCoun.j^ 

Plan. & Insp. ' » _ 

Rec. mnX. \7' 

Tech. Servs. * 

Training 


Public Affs. Off. ^ 

i /f6 

1 - Mr. Moore y 0 

1 - Mr. A. Steer™^ ' 

1 - Mr. Bassett , 

1 -/Mr. Daly AS JUN 3.2 

(Continued-over) 


vV 






53JUNI31979 


Buy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll' Savings Plan 


^ d--l 



t 


P. V,: Daly to Mr. Bassett Memorandum 
Re: United States v.. Gra.y Et Al 


DETAILS :' 

On 3/15/79, Chief Judge William Bryant ordered the 
Government to complete the discovery ordered by him in 
August 1978. by 3/30/79: or he would entertain a motion to 
dismiss the case. As it icurrently stands, we have completed 
all discovery with the exception of information relating to 
foreign direction, collaboration or influence as it applies 
to the Weatherman. ^ These documents can be divided into two 
categories:, (1) those that originate from a foreign govern- 
ment, and (2), those that • originate from a sensitive Bureau 
source or method. . As to foreign government material, the 
Department has taJcen the; position that this material cannot . 
be released to the defehse and have so advised the court. 

In an effort to satisfy the dourt and the defense, at the 
request of the Department, we isolated the documehts of this 
nature which are 15 in number. We then, reviewed pertinent 
Weatherman files to locate the information .contained in these 
documents in other documents, but not originating with a 
foreign government.: . This review was' generally successful, 
and bepartmental attorneys and paralegals reviewed that 
material on 3/12,13, and ,14/79. It is -the Department's 
intent to appear in camera ex parte with the Judge, show him 
the foreign .government :information, as well as ;the same- 
information from a nonforeign government.. By this, they hope 
to persuade the dourt to accept the substitute information 
for discovery purposes and not release the foreign government 
information. ; . * ' 

Judge Bryant 's discovery order is actually wider in 
scope as it applies to foreign government information than 
the material being discdvered. The order calls for the 
production of material relating to .foreign travel. 

Depar'tmental Attorney: Francis J. Martin's instructions to 
■the Bureau were do disregard the travel information as 
furnished by foreign go.vernments unless it related to foreign 
conriection, direction or influence. Martin believed this was 
consistent with Judge Bryant's ruling, that the Barker -Mar tine z. 
defense was available to the Miller and Felt. 


:Should the Juiige not accept this interpretation and 
demand production of all travel information, the amount of 
documents would increase from 15 to approximatly' 500. This, 


-. 2 - 


Greenberg/Gray-3015 



P. V.! Daly to: Mr. Bassett Memorandoam 
Re: United States v. Gray Et A1 


in Martin's view, would be an insurmountable obstacle since, 
in many instances, we cannot ;find alternative sources of 
information which might satisfy the court. 


As to Central Inteliigence Agency (CIA) and 
National Security Agency (NSA) material in our files which 
is subject to discovery, the Department is negotiating 
directly with those agencies as to production of the 
material. CIA has placed all but 29 of their discoverable 
documents, in the Department of Justice vault without redaction 
for defense review.. NSA has submitted paraphrased .versions of 
documents; for. defense review in those instances where it is 
not .possible to redact ;the doctiment. It, is CIA and NSA's. 
positions that this is . :f or discovery purposes and that dis- 
closure for trial is another question ehtirely. 

With regard to the informant problem raised in 
co nnection with :the n rosecution of Gray, Martin interviewed 
SA| ~f :oni 3/15/79 concerning the contact with 

I I : (FORMER).. Cleary amplified on the contents of 

the Lbs Angeles teletype of 3/14/79, which set forth the 
results of: his and ASAC Joseph V. Cbrless's contact with 
that source. Generally,; he identified and described the 
backgrounds of the, various people who: had knowledge o f the 

Martin, subsequent ;to the interview, requested a memorandtam 
be subitiitted to: him setting forth details regarding our 
contact with the sourcel. 

In light of the severance of Gray from Miller and 
Pelt and trial of Gray to; follow Miller , the resolution of 
the source question is less pressing at this time. 


- 3 - 


Greenberg/Gray-3016 



0-93 


157 


a 




DATE 

L3ZSD.Z.7ii_ 


Cjp 


PAGE 1 OF q 


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 
COMMUNICATION MESSAGE FORM 


:b6 

:b7C 



CLASSIFICATION 

JC.0.N.E 


PRECEDENCE 

_Iin.l1£l>.I.AXE. 


START HERE 


ALL IHFOEHATIOH COHTAIIffiD 
T iERlTr ~ Ty T OTC]: i5 55Tri^ FT ' ' 

liJHERE SHOM OTHERWISE 


IXIHPTID FROM AUTOILATIC 
DECLASSIFICATION 
ATJTHOP.ITY DIEIVED FP.OH: 

FBI AUTOIIATIC DECLASSIFICATION 
EXEMPTION CODE 2SX(1,6I 
DATE 03-02-2009 


_T0 LEGAL ATTACHE-, OTTAWA -CinilEDIATE} # 

LEGAL ATTACHE-, MEXICO CITY {IMMEDIATE} ( 

14LlEGAL attache-, hong KONG {IMMEDIATE} i 
_LEGAL ATTACHE-, TOKYO {IMMEDIATE} | 

12LBT 

c L 

lolUNITED STATES VERSUS L- PATRICK ^AY III-, ET AL^ DISCOVERY 
-PROCEEDINGS 

8L ON MARCH ONE FIVE-, LAST-, U-S- DISTRICT COURT JUDGE ORDERED 

Ugovernment to complete discovery proceedings by march three 

ZERO-, NEXT. PROSECUTION IS PREPARING TO PRESENT TO COURT 

_PAREN EXPARTE AND IN CAMERA PAREN AT THAT TIME ALL MATERIALS 

-ORDERED PRODUCED IN DISCOVERY WHICH HAVE NOT YET BEEN FURNISHED 

-THE DEFENSE-, ALONG WITH A CLAIM OF EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE BY 

REC-IU 

i-ATTORNEY GENERAL AS TO THESE DOCUMENTS AND INFORMATION. SOME 0 
THESE MATERIALS ORIGINATED WITH FIVE DIFFERENT FOREIGN 



DO NOT TYPE IViESSAGE BELOW THDS LINE 


< 1 JUN 12 


APPROVED BY 



DRAFTED BY 


DATE 

ROOM 

_JAM/CLS 


3/aD/7T 

^b3^/S 


f ElE'EXr^ 


GUllbE 




1979 



1 - MR. J. B. ADAMS 

1 “ MR. J. J. MCDERMOTT 

1 - MR. J. A. MINTZ ^ 

1 - MR. H. N. BASSETT r'£D £KftL BUfiLftU O f AM 

{ATTN: PAUL DALY} nOflMUMirATinNS SECTroir— j 

1 - MR. W. 0. CREGAR 

1 - 


T 


/ 3 







C 

aAJUN 131979 DO NOT FILE WITHOUT coMMUNicATioNsGP0ewt)erg/Gray-3O17 





0*93A (7-\9-77) 




JIAL DEPARTAAENT OF JUSTSCE 

FEDSRM BUREAU OF SMVESTIGATtOW 
COfVlMUWECATEON ;i/15SSAGE FO^fVl 


bl 

b7D 


(U) 

20 

18 

(U) 

16 

(U) 

14 

12 

(U) 



GOVERNMENTS AND RELATE TO S DS AND/OR WEATHERMAN INVESTIGATIVE 


RES ULTS . 

IN CONNECTION WITH THE CLAIM OF PRIVILEGE-, DEPARTMENT HAS 
RE(3LIESTED FBI DETERMINE WHETHER THE FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS OBJECT 
TO THE RELEASE OF THEIR MATERrAL- ^ 

FOR YOUR INFORMATION DEFENSE COUNSEL AND DEFENDANTS HAVE 
CLEARANCE FOR MATERIAL UP TO AND iNCLU^^ SCI. 

YOUR SOURCES SHOULD BE ADVISED THAT THE ITEMS FURNISHED 
BY THEM WILL BE SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED IF THEY DESI RE TO 

R e vi ew S A M E f o r P Di s c l os u r e t o th e de fe ns e - ^ 


10 


(C) 


THE FOREIGN AGENCIES WHICH FURNISHED THE PERTINENT 
DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS 




HANDLE PROMPTLY. S UTEL BY AM OF MARCH 2B-. CONTACT 

|JITH AUTHORITATIVE SPOKESMAN IS DESIRED-, BUT CONTACT SHOULD NOT 
BE DELAYED TO ACHIEVE IDEAL HIGH LEVEL CONTACT- CUI 


■,C.RE.:_ig,Dg_ i _RE.AS.O.N_0_ i _D.RD_MA.R.a.l_DU-i--MI]J... 


I 


Greenberg/Gray-3018 


FBl/DOJ 


C 


AL 


iWiil) SlIHli ISWd S<dAA AON OG. 




SNOIl StIHIA ASWd gi^Al lOM O0 



NOTE: 


: ; Coordinated; with SA P,aulr V. Daly Defense Discovery: Speciatlr ^ 

Records .Management Divisi6h'. ^ 'Restatements' requested Mar^ Nine,, 

- ; Last , 'by ^ Frank Martin , ; Tri al /Attorney , ^ . after ' edhf eirrihg with \ 

■ - Robert KdUch, Deputy Assistaht Attorney -;Gener'^l'. ; ^ t 




^APPROVEt]®*: 


ilrector 
.Apsoc. Dl 

Dep. AD^l 
DepwAcWny. 


■pm.Serv. 

. Crrm. Invl ^ 



Ident. 

^tell. ~ 

^irLaboratory 




Legal Courif, 
Plan.&lns^r*. |-.- 
Rec.Mgit, fMy 

Tech. Serve r, . jr ^ 
Trainin g ^ ^ ^ , 

Public 




'f 

I' 




r 




^ . Greenberg/Gray-302p 



0 210215Z MAR 19 


Z1W9 m H 




FM HONG KONG V 

& federal 8UREAU ,-,-n C 

\ OF investigationM-V' 

TO\DI RECTOR IMMEDIATE 0S0-20 joMMUNlCATiONS SECtlOH 


C 0 N £, 


J I A L 


0mi. 

mn- ittc — ; 

Cfim. hnv '' ' 

Went 

Wte». 

u»«to'V(ierv 

Lflgaf Ceurtn yT 
Ptan. * 

Rpc. Mprit. 

Tech, iterve. 

Trainirtk 

futhkMH.OIf. 

Te<ephpne Rm, 
lBtrmor'»S9k’f t 


UNITED STATES VERSUS L. PATRICK GRAY, III, ET AL ; DISCOVERY 
PROCEEDINGS. - 

REBUTEL, MARCH 20, 1979. 

CANNOT make INTELLIGENT APPROACH TO I I 


WITHOUT knowing EXACTLY WHAT MATERIALS THE DEPARTMENT WISHES TO 
RELEASE TO THE DEFENDANTS. 

DESPITE clearances OF DEFENDANTS AND COUNSEL, AMD THEIR 



PRIOR POSITIONS IN FBI , 


HAS PREVIOUSLY 


EXPRESSED, IN WRITING, THAT HE WISHES EVEN THE MERE FACT OF 


Of 


BI COOPERATION CONSIDERED CONFIDENTIAL, AND ALL INFORMATION 


PROVIDED TO BE CONSIDERED AT LEAST CONFIDENTIAL OR OF A HIGHER 


classification, AND MOT TO BE RELEASED OUTSIDE OF THE FBI WITHOUT 




PRIOR APPROVAL. 



1 1 JUN 12 1979 


DECLASSIFICATIOH AUTHORITY DERI¥IEI> FEOH; 
FBI AUTOILiTIC DICLASSIFICATIDH GUIDE 
DATE 03-03-2009 


53JUN 131979 


Greenberg/Gray-3021 




9 






PAGE TWO CO_X3=*— B=^:XJL I A L 

THIS approval is ROUTINELY OBTAINED IN CRIMINAL MATTERS, 

AND IN SECURITY MATTERS FOR PASSAGE TO OTHER SECURITY SERVICES. 
V/HAT THE POSITION OF THE | | WOULD BE WITH RESPECT TO DISCLOSURE 

EX Parte and in camera in this, case is not known, but legat 

BELIEVES IT WOULD DEPEND LARGELY ON THE NATURE OF THE MATERIAL. 

legat is certain that without informing^ ^ 

MATERIAL, THeI I WILL OBJECT TO RELEASE OF ANY REPEAT ANY 


:b7D 


OF THE SPECIFIC 


:b7D 


material PROVIDED BY IT. 

legat will POSTPONE CONTACT WITH 


ON THIS matter 


b7D 


UNTIL FURTHER ADVISED -BY HEADQUARTERS. 

C6E BY S37, REASONS 1, 2 AND 3, DRD MARCH 21, 2005. 


BT 


Greenberg/Gray-3022 



1 32 1 - 



FM 


6 

14 


12 


10 


— BEPARTMENTOFJUShue^^ 
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 
COMMUNICATION MESSAGE FORM 


PAGE 1 OF g 


DATE 

_3Z2.1.Z-73_ 



CLASS IFR^WJPN 

CON 


lAL 


PRECEDENCE 

inHEDIATE 


EXIHPTID FP.0H AUTOimilC 
■ .D. mil^S I FJLEAT I OH 




START HERE 


AUTHORITY DEP.IUID FROH: 

FBI AUTOMATIC DECLASSIFICATIOH 


V 


EXEMPT I on CODE ZSKiG) 
DATE 03-03-2009 


_EI 3 _I>.LKE.C.T 4 S.i_!: BI 

_T0 LEGAL ATTACHE, HONG KONG {II1I1EDIATE} | 

_BT 

UNITED STATES VS L- PATRICK GRAY III, ET AL^ DISCOVERY 
LPROCEEDINGS. 

RE HONG KONG TELETYPE, MARCH El, n7T 

INFORMATION SOUGHT TO BE USED IN CAPTIONED CRIMINAL PROSE\] 
CUTION IS OF A ROUTINE SECURITY NATURE AND CONSISTS OF 


(Cl 


WIA A J -yj 1{6 " r^-nr 


APPROVAL SOUGHT IS TO USE SECURITY MATTER 


DO NOT TYPE MESSAGE BELOW THIS LINE 


I I JUN 12 1979 



DRAFTED BY 

DATE 

ROOM 

TELE EXT. 

WKSsel^m 

JLT/CLS. -cm 

B/El/TR 

m=3M/S 



GDiaE 


1 - MR- H- N- BASSETT 
CATTN: PAUL DALY} 
1 - MR. Ill- 0- CREGAR 
1 - MR. I 


ALL IlFOBlIATIOl COHTAIliED 
HEPZIl IS UI-ICLASSIFIED EXCEPT 
liJHERE SHOOT OTHERIISE 

53 JUN 131979 



FEOEfiAL BUREAU OF INVESTlGATtoN 

CniVIMIIMinATinNS SECTION 

MAR 2 11979 





DO NOT 


Fim,j^v(iTH0UT COMMUNICATIONS grt^berg/Gray-3023 


FBI/DOJ 









0-93A (7-19-77) 


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 
COMMUNICATION MESSAGE FORM 


CONTINUATION SHEET 


KASEarTUiOreDE H(2 0132 C 0 N L 


J I A L 


_I.|\1.E.0.R.M.A-T.L0.N_IN A CRIMINAL PROSECUTION FOR DISCLOSURE TO 
20_APPR0PRIATELY cleared defense counsel DURING DISCOVERY ONLY AND 
18_N0T FOR USE IN A PUBLIC TRIAL- 


161 BT 



DO NOT TYPE MESSAGE BELOW THIS LINE 


Greenberg/Gray-3024 


DO NOT TYPE PAST THIS UNE 






Teletype to, Hong Korig' , . ' . . •' / - ■ - I 

Re ; US Vs L. Patrick 'Gray III , Et Al ;. Discovery Proceedings 


:b7D 


NOTE’:, 


. ’ ' ; Re f er enced 
to contact I 


Hong Kong cable ' re quest clarif ication of ■ instructioris , 

|set forth in’'B,urea.u Teletyp'er-. - 


•7 March 20 , 19 79 . 




APPROVp? rs’ 

Dfrecfar " 

-Assoc: Dir. ^ 

C^p. AC) Aifm; ' 
Dep. AD.tnv.. / ■ - 


Adm.'Serv. y - 
Crtnri. Inv. 

* WOMfc ~ 
Laboratory 


'■^^1 


Legal Cotin. 

Plan. llrtSp. 

Pec, Mgtii; 
~^t^ch. Servs. ' / 
Training . . 
Public Affs. Off. 









•• 



0 220520Z >]AR 79 

FM HONG /oNG (197-1) . . . 

TO DIB'KTOR IMMEDIATE ^ 

OF INVESTlOATiON 
,'OMHUHICATIOMS SECTI 

C 0 JLX-i- L I A L 



* 4 " 


Crim. Itiv 
Went, “ 



UNITED states- VS. L. PA.TRICK^RAY, III; ET AL ; 
DISCOVERY PROCEEDINGS. 

REBUTELS,. MARCH 20 AND 21, 1979. 


L60$^ Ca in. 

Wan, s >’!=;?.■ 

RB.’',; Msnt. 

f S'?!!. 

Trainifi ..7 

pub'io .'rffs 
i f alsphpn;; r?r]J., ^ 
I Di(‘33tor’9 Sec'/_f 







CAMERA REVIEW BY COURT AND/OR DEFENSE. 

C&E BY 007, REAGONO 1, 2 AND 3, DRD~ MARCH 22, 2009. '^* 

BT ■ 


V EXIIIPTID FROH AUTOliATIC 
DICLASSIFICATIOIJ 
AUTHORITY R1 RIVER FROH: 
FBI ATJTOIIATIC DECLASSIFI 
IXIHPTIOII CODl ZEXCS) 
DATE 03-03-2009 


ALL IlFOPI-IATIOIJ COITAIl-JED 
HEKEIl IS UrCLASSIFIElJ EXCEPT 
IJEEBE SHOOT OTHERWISE 


53JUN131979 





H /O; 

„7?5||wSem 


Mtm.m 

B^b A« 4 AM. ' 
Ah*. Ilr,* 

>«»i.Sdl 

Crfwk. bH 
ttftm. 

Wall. ~~ 


LaMfAory 
Lag It Co«ja 
I Wan. a WaM 
W )|— Rse. Mf nt. 
k_>'| Tech, nerve, 
Tra^lhl 
Public Mfi. 

f Talephgne Ri 
.Otraatbr'e 




UNITED states VERSUS L. PATRICK GRAY III, ET At; DISCOVERY 
PROCEEDINGS 

REBUTEL MARCH 20, 1979. RE LEGAT TELEPHONE CALL MARCH 22, 

1979. 


ADVISED ON MARCH 22, 19 79, THAT 


POLICY IS. NOT TO AUTHORIZ 


RELEASE OF THEIR DOCUMENTS AND INFORMATION AS IDENTIFIED IN 
RETEL. 

THEY BELIEVE THAT NO DOUBT THIS PRECEDENT SHOijLD 
BE CONTINUED IN THIS INSTANCE; HOWEVER, PRIOR TO GIVING A 
DEFINITIVE 'answer, THEY WOULD REQUIRE IDENTIFICATION OF 
MATERIAL IN QUESTION SO THAT IT COULD BE REVIEWED BY 
CAE H55, REASON 1, DRD MARCH 22, 2009. 

BT ' 


DECLASSIFICATION AUTHORITY DEMUIID FROM; 
FBI AUTOHATIC DECLASSIFICATION GUIDE 
DATE 03-03-2009 



REC-IU 


:b7D 



iV'2 















j3JUNI31979 . 

CA- UjQi!*. Cciwi 


Greenberg/Gray-3027 ’ 



K feoh autohat I c 

ICATIOU 
'./DEEIUlU FlOH: 

FBI AUTOmilC DICLASSIFICATIOH GUI: 
IXIHPXIOII CODE ZBXil.S) 

DATE 03-03^2009 


f 





0 222320Z AR 79 


0 


FM ME 



CITY 2P 


TO DIRECTOR IMMEDIAT| : NR 164-22 
BT ' 


21 112 

RECEIVED , 

FEOERil. aUREAU 
OF INVESTIGATION ^ 
lOMMUNICATIOMS SECTION 


As**». p#. 

AssI, (ir.> 

A(lm. 

Cfim. Inw, 
Idewt. "" — 

lnt«l. " 


o 


c 0 N_j:,:p=s-g:3a2AA^L 

UNITED STATES VERSUS L. PATRICK GRAY, III; ET AL 
PROCEEDINGS . 

REBUTEL march 20, 1979. 


LabMtory 
Legal Coun. 
Pfen. II kispr 
Rec. Mgnt. 
Tech.^rvs. 
Trainirtg 



public AKe. Off. 
Tcrfeptipne Ri 
OireMr’s Se^y 




DISCOVERY 

■ ALL IHFOPHATIOI COlITAIIffiD 
HEREIN IS raiCLASSiriED EXCEPT 
WHERE SHOOT OTHERWISE 



ON MARCH 22, 1979, CONTENTS OF REBUTEL WERE DISCUSSED WITH 


IMK 


'stated in 


m 



UNEQUIVOCAL TERMS THAT 


COULD NOT 


COUNTENANCE THE RELEASE 'OF MATERIAL RELATIVE TO CAPTIONED 
MATTER WHICH ORIGINATED WITH I I AND WAS 


I i JUN 12 1979 


b6 

b7C 

b7D 


PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED TO THE OFFICE OF LEGAL ATTACHE, MEXICO 


CITY, UNDER ANY CONDITIONS TO ANYONE OUTSIDE THE FBI. 


END PAGE ONE 


53 JUN 131979 





REQUESTED THAT HE BE ADVISED IN THE EVENT ANY ACTION 

TAKES PLACE WHICH WOULD ALLOW THE RELEASE OF THE MATERIAL 
OR WOULD DISCLOSE COOPERATION BY | 

I [ reiterated that I 

I ~l HE IS' QUALIFIED TO ADDRESS THIS SUBJECT AND HE IS 

AGAINST THE RELEASE OF MATERIAL WHICH ORIGINATED WITH THE 

| iN captioned matter. . 

CLASSIFIED AND EXTENDED BY ADSO; REASON DRD MARCH GQ , 

BT . 


be 

hlC 

hlD 


m 


AL 


Greenberg/Gray-3029 


ALL lUFOPHATION COIJTAIHED^.,, be 

HEE:5'IlJ‘h;S OTIC LAS SIFTED ' , :b7C 


[Deputy Special Coordi- 
nator, Special Coordinating Staff — 
Taiwan, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific 
Affairs, State Department, advised on 
3-21-79: 

The U. S, Government has no official 
representation on Taiwan, Unofficial 
representation in the form of the 
American Institute in Taiwan is planned 
but is not yet in operation because of 
lack of funds. Therefore, the U, S, 
Government has no way to approach author- 
ities on Taiwan. Furthermore, the U. S. 
Government has no official dealings with 
authorities from Taiwan anywhere in the 
world. 




Greenberg/Gray-3030 



ALL, JWOHHATI OH C OBTAINED 

HEkIiii is otclassified except 
DJ&ERE shoot otherwise 



0 2 ?. 06 mz 79 

FM TOKYO/ 



2?.MsrI9 0? 32? 


^,TO DIRECTOR IMMEDIATE 081-21 

/ : RECEIVED 

FEDERAL SUREAU 
OF IHVESTiOATION 
COMMUKICATIONS SECTION 




0 / N_^Er^e-se:3i:Xi_^ 

IJMITED STATES VERSUS L. PATRICK GRAY III, ET AL; 



be 

:b7C 

b7D 


DISCOVERY 


I 

Crtm. inv. 
Wont, ~ 

mtii. 

tilJimtory 
Legal Coun. * 
Wan, g insB“ 
Rec. Mgtrt. B 
Tech.||erv^ 
T(;alnirf| 


f fublle Alfa. Off. 

aSSP!^- 


PROCEEDINGS. 


REBUCAB march 20', 1979; TOKCABS MARCH 27 & 2S, 197S, BUCAB 
march 24 , 1978, CAPTIONED, "SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONgj 
SENATE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS" FOREIGN LIAISON MATTER. 

ENTIRE TEXT CLASSIFIED'cO^Ft^&ait^ 

ON march 22, 1979, (MARCH 2! WAS JAPANESE HOLIDAY), 



WAS CONTACTED AS RE- 


QUESTED IN REBUCAB. DURING CONTACT IT WAS POINT OUT THAT 


CONSIDERS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FBI AND | | T0 BE CONFI- 
DENTIAL AND ANY INFORMATION EXCHANGED IS CONSIDERED TO BE CONFI- 
DENTIAL AND FOR FBI USE ONLY, PARTICULARLY IM MATTERS, OF A ^CURITY 
advised THAT WITHOUT FULL STUDY OF THIS imER 


NATURE. 


INCLUDING THE DETAILS OF THE CASE AND CONTENT OF THE 

QUESTION THAT HE COALD NOT RESPOND AS TO WHETHER OR MOT | | ! AS AN 


OBJECTION TO THE RELEASE OF DOCUMENTS OR INFORMATION FROM THE 


EXEHPTED FROH AUTOHAT I C - 

DICLASSIFICATIOM 

AUTHORITY RIEIUEU FROH: , . ... 

FBI AUTOI-OITIC DECLASSIFICATIOII GUIDE 
EXEHPTIOH C0Dl-2EXi:S) 

DATE 03-03-2009 




V\V«’ 


Tb.’- 



53 JUN 131979 







^ ' ■ 'GreeihBerg/Gray-3031 




PAGE TWO cop3e«Ci.i^ 

FOP EXAMIMATION BY THE DEFENDANTS IN COURT PROCEEDINGS REFERRED 
TO IN REFERENCED COMMUNICATION. 

IT IS NOTED THAT BY REFERENCED ■ CABLE DATED 3/27/7S, TOKYO 
RESPONDED TO REQUEST TO . CONTACT ] [ ALONG SIMILAR LIMES. AT THAT 
TIME THE ] [ REQUESTED THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN | | AND FBI BE KEPI 

CONFIDENTIAL AND FURTHER INDICATED IN PART THAT DATA IS PROVIDED 
THE FBI by ] [ for INFORMATION ONLY. aT THAT TIME WHEN MATTER WAS 
THOROUGHLY DISCUSSED,] [DESIRED NO DISCLOSURES TO ANYONE OUTSIDE 


AND FBI BE KEPT 


THE FBI. DURING THE 3/22/79 MEETING WITH 


A DESIRE TO MAIN- 


TAIN THE LONG STANDING CONFIDENTIAL RELATIONSHIP WAS EXPRESSED, 
ALSO A CONCERN THEREFORE WAS- EXPRESSED. LEGAT TOKYO DOES NOT FEEL 


THIS STANCE WILL CHANGE. 


ADVISED HE WOULD STUDY MATTER BUT 


WEEDS TO SEE CONTENTS OF DOCUMENTS I^3 QUESTION BEFORE DECISION IS 


MADE. 


TOKYO FILES CONTAINING INFO ON SDS AND WEATHERMAN ARE LIMITED 


AND REVIEW OF SAME LOCATED NO INFORMATION FROM [ [| 



IS NOT IN A POSITION TO MAKE A DECISION ALONG THE LINES DESIRI 


Greenberg/Gray-3032 



IN REFERENCED CABLE. IM ORDER TO OBTAIN SUCH A DECISION SAME 
EOULD HAVE TO BE HANDLED BY LETTER, (TELEPHONE INSECURE) OR 
( S ) THR 01JO H A S SI ST A MC E O f O S I, " N ISC 


(S), 


BUREAU IS REQUESTED TO ADVISE IF STATEMENTS BEYOND THOSE 
SET OUT IN REFERENCED CABLES ARE NEEDED IN RESPONSE TO CURRENT 
REQUEST. IF NOT, BUREAU IS REQUESTED TO SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFY 
DOCUMENTS IN QUESTION AMD FURNISH THEIR CONTENTS SO DECISION BY 
AGENCIES INVOLVED CAN BE MADE. 

ADMINISTRATIVE; 

LEGAT TOKYO NOTES THAT CONTACT 0F | | on 3/2B/79, CAUSED SOME 
CONCERN IM VIEW OF POTENTIAL POLITICAL RAMIFICATIONS AND QUESTIONS 


Greenberg/Gray-3033 




AS TO RELATIONSHIPS WITH FOREIGN AGENCIES, ALSO SOME COMCERM 
WAS EXPRESSED AS TO CONFIDENTIALITY BETWEEN FBI AJD | |. 

LEG AT POINTED OUT THAT BECAUSE OF THE BUREAU'S RECOGNITION 
OF THE EXISTING CONFIDENTIAL RELATIONSHIP THAT | | waS BEING 
CONTACTED AND ASKED SPECIFICALLY. AS PERTAINS TO A PARTICULAR 
CASE IN VIEW OF THE DISCOVERY PROCEEDINGS AND ORDERS OF THE USDC 
JUDGE. THE EXPLANATION ASSURED | | OF OUR DESIRE TO CONTINUE TO 
MAINTAIN THE CONFIDENTIAL RELATIONSHIP BUT FEARS EXIST THAT IF 
SUCH INFORMATION IS RELEASED FROM FBI CONTROL THAT .THE CONFIDENTIAL 
NATLRE of same WILL NOT BE MAINTAINED. LEGAT TOKYO HOPES THAT 
IN VIEW OF THE REQUESTS FOR CONFIDENTIALITY WHICH WERE MADE IN 
MARCH, 1978, THAT SUCH CAN BE UTILIZED AS RESPONSE IN CURRENT 
MATTER. AS WELL AS IN ANY FUTURE MATTERS OF AN IDENTICAL OR 
SIMILAR NATURE. 

C AND E 1013 ; REASON .g, DRP MARCH 30, 1999. ■ 

BT • 


Greenberg/Gray-3034 



ALL IHFORHATIOU COIilTAIlED 
HEKEIH 13 OTCLAS3IFIED 
DATE 03-03-2009, BY 65179 cMli/barj/4 


Greenberg/Gray-3035 


UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT 

Memorandum 


UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 


TO 


: The Director 
FROM : Legal Coun 


6 

subject: W. mark felt 






Tech. Servs. . 
Training . 


Public Affs. Oft. 

Telephone Rm. 

Director's Sec’y . 




At 2:04 p. m. , March 22nd, Mary Lawton, Office of Legal 
Counsel, Department of Justice, called me and said that Mark Felt 
had been briefed today regarding certain security information in orde 
to grant him a security clearance in connection with the pending crimii 
prosecution. She said that following his briefing, Mr, Felt refused\to 
sign the oath and said that his refusal was based on the fact that if he ' 
so it would interfere with the publication of his book which contains 
information concerning the specific program involved in the briefing. 



Ms. Lawton said that the Department is considering whether 
it is necessary to apply for an injvmction against publication of the 
classified material in the book. For that purpose, she requested a copy 
of the employment secrecy agreement, if any, Mr. Felt may haveasigned 
while employed at the FBI. 

Ms, Lawton also inquired as to whether anyone in the FBI* has 
given Mr, Felt authorization to include classified materialriir^iis-book,_„ 



RECOMMENDATIONS: 


12-i]979 


(1) That the Records Management Division furnish a" copy o 
employment agreement Mr, Felt may have signed to Ms, Lawton, 

APPROVED: Adm.Serv._ 

Crim. Inv. 


Director 

Assoc. Dir. 

Dep. AD Adm. 
Dep. AD Inv. 


Ident. 
Inteil. ' 


Laboratory 


Legal Coun. 
Plan. & Insp, 
Rec Mgnt. 
Tech. ServsT 
Training 



'Public Affs, Off. 


(2) That the Records Man^ement Division adyise Ms, Lawton 
whether Mr. Felt has been authorized by the Bur^uitb 'include in his'bq 



any classified information, 
JAM:nls (7) 

1 - Mr. Adams 1 - 

1 - Mr. McDermott 1 - 

1 - Mr, Bassett 1 - 


Mi*. 

Mr. 

Mr, 


APPROVEDf A'dm. Serv, 

r Crim. Inv._ 

Ident. 

Cr 
Long 
Mintz 


Director 

Assoc. Dir. 
ep. AD Ac 
bp. AD Inv. 


Legal Coun 
Plan. & insi 
Rec Mgnt.( 



Laboratory 


N 1 3 Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan 





bl 

b6 

b7C 

:b7D 


, , V‘*,. * 

[ A»st. . 

AOm. Si 4#;/ " 
Crim. inv * ' 
Ment. 
infel' 

' nrv 

Cn‘;n. 

P’art ?. t*"?*.-) ' 
Re''.. 

Ter*- 
Trafn*'^? 

Pub'i.? V ? Off 

1 T9lephpf)« !Vm,' 
Difeotor’sSec’y ~ 



REBUCAB MARCH 22 , 1979. 

RELEASE OF INFORMATION ORIGINATING WITH 


IN CAPTIONED MATTER 


, WAS DISCUSSED ON MARCH 23 , 1979, WITH 


(S) 


ADU ISED □ totally opposed to information concerning □ 


BEING RELEASED TO DEFENDANTS AND DEFENSE COUNSEL. 


BT 


C &E BY 2A1 5 ; REASON (1); DilD MARCH 23, 2009. 







IXIUPTED FROH AUTOmilC 
DICLASSIFICATIOM 
AUTHORITY OIRIUED FROH: 

FBI AUTOI-OITIC DECLASS I FI CAT I Oil CUIDl 
EXEMPT I OH CODE ZBXiS) 

DATE 03-03-2009 


ALL IlFOPI-IATIOl COMTAIHED 
HERE II IS OTCLAS3IFIED EXCEPT 

TpHepi: shoot oteieriise 


1 1 JUN 12 1979 



5 3 JUN 13 1979 G,^enberg/Gray-3036 



)VER1 

Memorandum 




UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT 


TO 


FROM 


subject: 


Mr. Basset 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 


date: 3/27/79 




Assoc.^Dir. 

^^Dep. AD Adm. 

lnv.\ 

Asst. Dir.; 

Adm. Servs. 

Crim. Inv. 

Ident. 

Intel). 

Laboratory 
Legal Coun. 
Plan. & Insp] 
Rec. Mgnt. 

Tech. Servs. 
Training 
Public Affs. Off. . 

Telephone Rm. 

Director’s Sec'y _ 


PURPOSE ; The purpose of this memorandum is to secure approval 
for two affidavits to be signed by the writer and submitted 
to the court in this matter. 

RECOMMENDATION ; That attached affidavits be executed and 
furnished the Department. 


ALL IHFOKHATIOII CONTAIHED 

HEREIN 13 UNCLASSIFIED 

DATE 03-03-2009 BY 65179 dmli/tiaTj/sbs 






J 




approvei 


Director 
h^oc. 

Oep. AD 
Dep.ADl|{v. 


Da . Serv. 

V)' Crim, Inv. 



|nt5H. 

Laboratory 



Legal Coun, 
Plan, a 
Ree. M) 

Tech. Sf rvsT 
Traininf 
Public ArtsTefT 


Ink, 0EHINQ tiL£ 



■ 


Enclosures (2) 

1 - Mr. Adams 
1 - Mr . McDermott 
1 - Mr. Steel 
1 - Mr . Cregar 
1 - Mr. Mintz 
1 - Mr . Bassett 
1 - Mr . Daly 


A 







6 ‘ 



PVDtjeg (8) 


Continued on Page Two 
Greenberg/Gray-3037 
Buy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan 




Memorandum from Mr. Daly to Mr. Bassett 
Re: U. S. vs. Felt et al. 


DETAILS : Francis J. Martin of the FBI Task Force U. S. 
Department of Justice! requested two affidavits be prepared 
for submission to the court pertaining to certain! discoverable 
information in our possession originating, with foreign police 
and intelligence services. The affidavits are to.be submitted 
in connection with the proposed claim of privilege by the '• . 
Attorney General. 

The information prompting the submission of these 
affidavits pertains to foreign direction, collaboration 
and contacts by the Weathermen and their associates. An 
effort was made in each instance to find parallel information 
which did not originate with a foreign police or foreign 
intelligence service. While this was generally successful 
there were six instances where parallel information could 
not be located. ^ We also, at the request of the Department 
contacted all the foreign governments with one exception. 

The governments responded through our legats denying permis- 
sion to release of the information to the defense, "^o 
of the governments conditioned . their response by stating 
they would be willing to review the documents in question 
and give a definitive answer. Absent such a review both 
governments requested the material not be released. We 
have forwarded the documents to those governments through 
the appropriate legat. Mr. Martin, who has reviewed the 
documents in question and is aware as to the details of 
their responses, has elected not to wait for any change 
in those two governments' response and to go forward with 
the affidavits. The one instance where contact could not 
be made involved | I In view of this 

Government's current lack of diplomatic relations with that 
country. State Department requested we not contact them. 

Martin is fully cognizant of this problem. 

The attached affidavits were discussed in detail 
with Mr. Martin and his associate Lubomyr M. Jachnycky. 

Both stated that as to style and content they met with their 
approval. 


Greenberg/Gray-3038 


2 




c ^ -i / f 


Greenberg/Gray-3039 






ALL' IHFOKHATIOH COmiHED 
' HEREJH^S .iraiCLASSIFIED' ■ ; 
DAT^-iR-03-2009 BY 65179 tMti/bawHP 



3/29/79 

Paul V. Daly 

Federal Bureau of Investigation 
ARREST CHECK . 

WITNESS LIST ■ : . 


Frank Martin ‘ o 

Department of Justice ^ 



■ he 

y^..~ 

■ .b7C 


)■'. 


Pursuant to your request, the below-listed present 
arid past employees of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) 
were searched in the records of the Identification Divisionv 


FBI. No arrest record for any of these individuals was', 
located . . , 


Adams. James B. 

Branigan, William.' 
Conrad. Ivan W . 


Kitchens, Thomas W. Jr. 
LaPrade, J. Wallace 
Mack, Paul L. 

Mnr)-r<a. Hrinald W. .Tr. 



Assoc. Dir. 

Dep. AD Adm 
Dep. AD Inv, 

Asst. Dir;: 

Adm. Servs. _ 

Crim. Inv. 

Ident. 

Intel 1. 

Laboratory _ 

Legal Cpun. 

Plon. & Insp. 

Rec. Mgnt. _ 

Tech. Servs. 
Training 
Public Affs. OH. _ 
Telephone Rm. 




■ l!% 


■ f 


Bishop, Thomas E. 
Cleveland, William V 
Decker, Andrew J. 
Hoxie, Herbert E. 



Shackleford . Robe rt L. 


Sullivan. William A. 


•Young, Paul C. 




tl tF JUN Ig 1979 




•v 




6 



Greenberg/Gray-3Q55 



y' / ‘’/■'V'/p^'"'' ,;Kr;cKS; .,i:;;,t)y inventory 


•/|t 


_*j, Adfams , Janos 11. yJ- - o ‘’'■>01 

302 10/13/76 />w/ ai 

o f r i. c: o iiU: o r vi c.-.w 7/11/77 ) j. \ 

office interviev? 5/9/78 C^L^chf (C) 

'l''>09 ! 


T 





302 7/p/77 

office iritervipw 8/n /7A 




, 3502 

1/ Cl^l I (A) 

(B) 

1 (C) 


bS 

be 

b7C 


. 3503 

oixice---l4^t:erviev7 (3) >Spnb .76 (A-C) 

OCti/i! (D) 
(E) 


b3 

be 

b7C 


* r> 


■, - ^ , 

3504^3 

J (■ (A) 




»>Bran3,gan, William i . t 

office interview Zll'blll ' 

a ^ 

’ ■' br'^^w 


3505 

(A) 


] ' 3506 


Jl 


JL 


(A) 



*V;ir 


A 


-CL. 






^IJir^tr-^rrrt^T-A/i ow 1 r> / 1 a /7f. 






3508 

• C ' ^ 


3509 


oirice interview 10/8/76 , (a) 

office interviev/ ^Cm' (b) 

. (G) 


:b3 

be 

b7C 




Jl. 


UIVI-U U'bu.y ,r'i24.i-ir.' 


* c 








(D) 

V^- 

, 3510 *=3 

W 


ip c/y/f 3511 b3 
^ (A) 


ALL IlFOm-IATIOl COHTlIIffiD . ' 

HEEEDI IS IHJCLISSIFIED 

DATE. 03-03-2009 BY 65179 cMti/baw/sbs ' 



Greenberg/Gray-3056 







/ 


be 


ofj'icG inl:e:>:vicw *• A/24/78 








offico interview transcriptr^;>>'^‘ 

8/20/7O 

] 


xl 


ofiice interview V?.ll fll AM 
office interview transcript 
12/7/77 PB 




/ 






302 - 11/8/76, 6/28/77 
office interview 1/12/78 

Hack, Paul i.. /» ■' 

office interview 1112111', 2/2/78 
'• '^ 1 ^ •• ... ..X 

• 'C ■ 

^ 




* [ 


3512 ^ 
(A) 

3513 b3 


(A) 

(B) . 

(C) 

(B) 
(E) 

3514 
(A-B) 

(C) 

3515 
(A-B) 


be 

:b7C 


•3516 

(A) 


b3 

be 

b7C 




1 


1 c 




T 








office interv^iew 1/18/78 

^ - f.v/ 


office interview 3/18/7 &' 


iU2. 




o f f r ce in t ervi. e w-ii / z i / 7 6 
office interview 2/22/7 8 y 








C>^l 


office interview 78 




^ ^ / i>*'f 


3517 

bS 



3518 

be 

(A) 

b7C 

3519 

b3 

(A) 

(B) 

be 

b7C 

3520 

■b3' 

(A) 

be 

(B). 

■b7C 

(C) 


3521 

be 

(A) 

'b7c' 

3522 

"bS 

(A) 

be 


302 10/1/76 
office interviews' (2) 


3523 

(A) 

(B-C) 

(D) 


:b7C 


b3 

be 

b7C 


Greenberg/Gray-3057 



Q. 








WW 302 - 8/24/76 

302 - 10/26/76 
office intrervicv/ SinilS 




I 

\ 






i>/[ 




'A^'l 


* 


^ I- 


' 3524 b3 

(A) 



.6' 




office interview 9/14/76 


(B) 

(C) 

(D) 

00 

'■ JTA/ 3526 

(A) 

(B) 

Yc- r:^zbn 


office Interview 3/15/7 8 (A) 

1 (B) 


b3 

b6 

b7C 

:b3 
be ,■ 
b7C 

b3 ■ 

b6 

b7C 


rr 




office interview - 1/10/78 

-A' {. fy ^ 


"• - •y,:|,3528 b3 

, ’ (A) 

b6 

^ 3529 t7c 


JA\. 


office interview 'i/Zb/ /b 
<1 ,. ■ ■/ y 


^ , JJJU 
(A) 


office interview 8/27/76 


[ 


-O- 


.. ,£y 


office interview 8/Z0/7 




10/21/76 


;p7 2 


JL 




V- 


,X-'' 


3531 

(A) 

(B) 

3532 

(A) 

(B) 

(C) 

(D) 

3533 


be 

:b7C 

b3 

be 

b7C‘ 


b3 
be ; 
b7C 


302 9/7/76 (A) -B 

office interview - 4/28/7 8 (B) 

7) I (c) 


♦. ,^'Young, Paul C. 302 10/6/76.if 3534(A) 
Waiver of RiRhts Forms: 

.'A 


b3 

b6 

b7C 


LaPradO^ J. Wallac e 




(3513-F) 
^(3520-D) be 

:b7C 


Greenberg/Gray-3058 



Iminunj.tY Ap.reerr.cnts ; 


(3/31/78) 


(9/14/76) 




( 8 / 27 / 76 ) 




(3503-G) 
(3522-B) 
(3526-C) 
(352 7-C) 
(3531-C) 
(3532-E) 
(3533-D) 



* No arrest record on basis of Bureau personnel fingerprints filed in 
criminal file former Bureau personnel fingerprints retrieved from 
civil file and researched against criminal file. 


** Unable to identify with arrest record on the basis of information 

furnished. This is a name check only. No fingerprints located crimrhdL 
or civil files. 


Greenberg/Gray-3059 



UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT 

Memorandum 

uh 


TO 


FROM 






be 

bvc 


UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 


date: 3/30/79 


1 - 


1 - 


subject: EDWARD S. MILLER 

DOCUMENTS ORIGINATED MORE THAN 
ir TWENTY YEARS AGO INVOLVING O 

CLASSIFIED INFORMATIOH >Vj ^ 



6 


Assoc. Dir. 

Dep. AD 

Dep. AD Inv. 

Asst. Dir.: 

Adtn. Servs. 

Crim. Inv. 

Ident, 

Intell. 

Laboratory 

Legal Coun. 

Plan. & Insp. 

Rec. Mgnt. 

Tech. Servs. 

Training . 


Public Affs. 0(1. . 

Telephone Rm. 

Director’s Sec’y _ 


:b7c 



FBI dociiments containing classified information and 
originated more than twenty years ago have been denied the 
requester. These documents are listed in an appeal addendim'J' 
a copy of which is attached along with the staff comments 
the Department Review Committee (DRC) . 

Prior to presentation to the DRC the FBI declassifie 
page 1 of documents 1 and 2, brackets at bottom; document 3, 
page 1, brackets at bottom (except stenographic reference), and 
page 2, paragraph 7; document 4, page 1, brackets at bottom 
(except stenographic reference) and page 2, paragraph 6 
(except information in brackets); document 5, page 1, brackets 
at bottom (except stenographic reference) . 

The remaining documents were presented to the DRC on 
2/7/79, at which time the DRC unanimously determined that the 
20-year old material is within the purview of the Attorney 
General's prior decisions on such material and classification 
was upheld. 

Action : Disclosure Section should review this request in 

line with the above decision and insure that all 
appropriate material is processed for release to^ requester. 

REC-114 


Enclosurej- 


^CG: jmh' 
(3) 




ALL IHFORIIATION COMTAIHED 

HERE III IS UIJCLASSIFIED 

DATE 03-03-2009 BY 65179 dmh/baw/sbs 



be 

b7C 


Greenberg/Gray-3060 
N 1 3 197 Suy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan 



NWiL - Pcrsonnel^^i le of Edward S. 

COMPONENT : 


Miller, 67-45111^ 

^ FBI 


ADDRESS : 

DRC # : 

; 

FOIPA # : 


DOCUMENTS "INVOLVED AND COMPONENT'S POSITION: * 


SEE ATTACHMENTS 


Greenberg/Gray-3061 


STAFF COMMENTS : * The documents in this case, which are over 20-years old, are 
the si±iject of a discovery request in criminal litigation. 

The Committee should revieiv documient 3, page 1, bracketed information, 
and page 2 , paragraph 7 (representative) and document 6 , page 1 , bracketed infor- 
mation (representative) to determine whether continued classification is warranted. 
The remaining information appears to be appropriately characterized by the F.B.I., 
as it concerns intelligence activities, sources or methods, the release of which 
would cause at least identifiable damage to the national security. The classifica- 
tion of this material has been coordinated with another government agency having a 
direct interest in the subject matter. 

(Continued on next page . . . . ) , 


DECISION OF THE REVIEW COMMITTEE: 

Page 1 of . documents 1 and 2, brackets at bottom; document 3, p. 1, 

1. DECLASSIFY: brackets at bottom (except stenographic reference), and p. 2, 

paragraph 7; document 4, p. 1, brackets at bottom (cont. next pg.).. 

2. UPHOLD CLASSIFICATION: ,, , . ^ ^ ..a. i™ 

All documents listed per attachment, except as noted 

3. CONSULT WITH: ' 


4. REGRADE TO: 

The Committee determined that application of the "balancing 

5. OTHER: test" was not appropriate. . ■ 

The Conmittee unanimously determined that the 20-year old classified 

6. COMMENTS: information is within the purview of the Attorney General's prior 

decisions on such inf orrriation . 


DATE OF MEETING; 


February 


7,. 1979 


CHAIRMAN : 


Robert Keuch 


* THIS PORTION SHOULD BE .UNCLASSIFIED IF POSSIBLE - IF NOT, USE 
CLASSIFIED ATTACHMENT. USE SUPPLEMENTAL PAGES IF THIS SPACE IS 
INADEQUATE, 

'All IlFOm-IATIOl COl-mil-IED 
HEEEDI IS •IWCLASSIFIED 





Edward S. Miller (continued from p. 1) 


STMT COMMENTS: 

In view of the fact. that this information may directly impinge on 
a pending criminal matter, and may, therefore, affect either the rights of 
the defendants or the government's .ability to conduct a successful prosecu- 
tion, or both, tire staff recanmends that the Committee consider whether 
application of the "balancing test" is appropriate. 


DECISION OF. THE REVIEW COM.MITTEE: 


1. DECLASSIFY: (except stenographic reference) and p. 2, para- 

graph 6 (except information in brackets); document 5, page 1 
brackets at bottom (except stenographic reference) . 


Greenberg/Gray-3062 



;QU ESTER: 


PAGE 


FBI rccord3 have been reviewed and the following portions of docunents 
listed have been classified: . j, 

! EXTENTION REFERENCE 

CUM ENT DES CRI PTI ON PAGE PARAG RA PB CT.ASS IFICATION FCIM, II, 1-2. 4.2 


- <.v> ^ YTL. 

\ (L ' ■» A.% 

1 

/ , 

1>K 

O/'O'j Lx.-ri-.'- 
A.r.iL t-v:T.!;-r,v 

/ 

y/bonf ident ial 

Secret 

Top Secret 

(2) 

(3) . 

Other 


/ 

.>1 ^ 

^Confidential 

Secret 

i^-Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) . 

(3) . ' 

Other 


■ 

Ud/'.’o ^Ap 

✓Confidential 

Secret 

. Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) . 

Other 


JL 

/ cAui' 

Confidential 

Secret 

.^Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) . • 

(3) . 

Other 

' 


7 ’ 

Confidential 

i^-Secret 
^Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 7. 

Other 


3 

OXCL 

tXp 

/ ) ^ 

; / 

'/•Confidential 

Secret 

Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

Other 

Zic7ci , 

c Kyz/'fu 

7c>r./s7 

/ 

L'/ti c 

v"? • 

^Confidential 

Secret 

^Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) .. 

Other 


/ 


^Confidential 

Secret 

,/Top Secret 

(1) - ' 

(2) 

(3) ...^ 

Other 

1 

/ 

r .. s ^ 1 A 

b^Sllr.x 

. i 

y.- Confidential 

Secret 

Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) , 

Other 


o2. 

. 

GjlC. . IvincXli 

v-'Conf idential 

^Secret 

^'rop Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) . 

Other 


ALL IlFORHATIOH COHTAIHED’ 

HEKEii IS OTCLAssiFiED Greenberg/Gray-3063 

DATE 03-03-2Q09 BY 65179 cMi/baw/sbs 


FDI/DOJ 


























FBI.rc!cocd3 h-ivc been r^^ewed and the following p^^tlono of doc.uncnta 
listed have been classiWed; 


?m?:nt dr.^^criptioh 

PAGE ’ 

PARAGRAPH 

CIJ'^SSIFICATION 

EXTKN’TIOr: REFERENCE 
FCIM, II, 1-2. 4. 2 

■ ■ ■ . 1 — 

2. 


^Confidential 

Secret 

c--Top Secret 

(2) .. 

(3) 

Other 


A 

3 

^Confidential 

1 Secret 
• Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

Other 


3 ' 

Gjl'-l G icir-. V'iir^ 

C,-,j.,. tep 

-'Confidential 

• Secret 

. ^Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) - 
(3) . 

Other 


O • 

i "0 

/ , o 

^Confidential 

Secret 

i.-Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) ‘ 

(3) - 

Other 

• 


J' 

^Confidential 

Secret 

Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) ■- 
(3) . ' 

Other 

/fu 7^/' 3 

Ciir.L- ■> 

j/O '<T c] cSiiL^ 

y -y 7 

7 

Tu-p c. luli, 
■'.:'£<■ csiivpyij 

_^Conf idential | 

Secret 

^Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

Other 


/ 

/ 1 .J/ O 

Confidential 
..Secret 
Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

Other 

• 

/' 

i-L j o 

■ Confidential 

Secret 

_^Top Secret 

(1) - • 

(2) 

(3) 

Other 

t 

A 

o.e(i 

7 

j/^onf idential 

Secret 

Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

Other - 


0 


Confidential 

Secret 

^Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) < 

other 


Greenberg/Gray-3064 - 


FDI/DOJ 



























.FDI rccor(3a have been ^viewed and the following ^rtiono of docuiae'nta 
llatbd have been classl^cd: , • . " 


. ' EXTKNTIOW nEFEREh'CE 

rUMKNT DESCRIPTIO!^ PAGE PARAG RA PH CL AS r^IFICA TI ON FCIM , IX^ 1-2. ■1.2 


^ V 



Con fidontial 

Secret 

Top Secret 

—ai 

(2) 

(3) 

Other 

"sttco 

O'rV vl f 

■rJ cLu^^cl C-/. S/S7 

■ 

/ 

L^ Vr/V r U, -;) CbKL 
’v''v'!7r^V>. rryi^ 

' } . i '. i ;■- /. .. 

Confidential 

Secret 

^Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

Other 

• 

7 

j .:’C 

/ ^2^-. 6" 

Confidential 

• Secret 

. Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) ✓ 

Other 


/ 


^Confidential 

Secret 

✓Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) ✓ ‘ - - 

(3) . 

Other . 


■ 

Clli t 

✓Confidential 

Secret 

Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) , , 

Other 


■ 

) thilL -^D 

Confidential j 

Secret i 

, Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) . 

Other 

! 

7 

-If-'./’ / 

v') f-yt-ui^- L) 

^Confidential 
✓Secret 
Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) ✓ 

(3) 

Other 

/s7 -7 

ti.e (TA'v^ , ■'-•'cit.'/ 

., .y. e’j ■ / .r, /,r •-’ 

/ 

/ 

// 7 ? 

Confidential 
(✓Secret 
^Top Secret 

( 1 ) 

(2) 1- ' ' 

(3) 

Other 

1 

/ 

^ / a" 

* 471 A 

. Confidential 

Secret 

„>Top Secret 

( 1 ) 

(2) - • ' 
(3) 

Other • 


/. 

( 7 . l '. '/<■ ■• -i- 7 7 

yCon fidontial 

^ Secret 

^Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

Other 


FDI/DOJ 


• Greenberg/Gray-3065 


























• ■■ -■—■*' . .. t 

FDI rccocda have been r^^ewed and the 
Hated have been classl^cd; , • 


JTiVOli 


Collowlng 




Iona o£ docviraentd' 


JMKNT DP'.^CRI PTIO!^ 

_PJV3E_ 

P/\RAGIb\PH 

CLASS IFICATIOM 

■EXTEHTIOM REFEREIICS 
FCIH, ir, 1-2. 4. 2 



- , . P -<■'• 

v>-!t/r!j'l;.:->. 
UV^P ; ts-rw-' 

^Confidential 

-..Secret 
Top Secret 

Tiy- ■ - - 

(2) 

(3) 

Other 


0 . 

/,,p' 

Confidential 

. Secret 

....-Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) . 

(3) . 

Other 

'f. ’..'^ ^fo ■ 

Ay/^^yi ji^ K'/'/> u ''j-:<U 

/ 

OJil- ':^7:/.cAa' 

C2ji 

\ ^ 

►-Confidential 

• Secret 

. Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

Other 


/ 

j '? ;■'• 

/ J J ^ 

^Confidential 

^Secret 
Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) ^ ' 

(3) - 

Other 

- 

1 

! 

/ 

^ ' ' 

i 

Confidential 
• Secret ' ' 
i^op Secret 

(1) 

■ (2) 

(3) 

Other 

<:^.ctccr/zi >iz:. 7 

X Ct.TyX, J. a, 6'- 

1 r ,1 / / ! /r^ 

' / 

n 

O ; 

Confidential 

Secret 

i.^Top- Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) .. 

Other 

" . . --1 .J . ^ L.. I ^ . f . . 1 . . - 1 

C^ct^-yy-ai 'ZJZ h' 

^^ ci.-ncL 'yriu. rru 

y;u d '■ j'A yu’-'if Arj c.. ! 

' / 

3 ’■ 

^Confidential 

Secret 

_^Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) . . 

Other 




^Confidential 

Secret 

Top Secret 

(1) - • 

(2) 

(3) 

Other 

t 



■. Conf idential 

Secret 

Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) . 

Other 



■ * 

^Conf idential 

Secret 

Top Secret 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

Other 


Greenberg/Gray-3066 ’ • fbi/doj 












/ 


er 



COWARD 
^AR' 8. COHCN 
, ?. Gettings 
- ' u C. SwcR 
.:.LiAM L- STAurrcR, Jr. 
;;-:.annc r. Alper 
iAMCs T. Devine 
'rank V/. Oukwam, Jr. . 
Iark D. Cumminus* 


Leon 




LAW orricES 

Cohen, Gettings and 


SUITE 550 

1700 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE* N.W. 



Washington. D. C. 20006 


U02) 072-1095 




Virginia Offices 

lAOO NORTH UHLE STREET 

courthouse square 
Arlington. Virginia 22ai6 
1703) S2S-2260 


rM«Cai VIMIMIA SAM OMI.T 

IcT 


April 2, 1979 


Honorable William B. Bryant 
United States District Judge 
United States District Court 
Washington. D-C. 20530 


t . 

EXEMPT ID FROM AUTOHiLTIC 
DICLASSIFICATION.' 
authority' DEEIUED FROM: 

FBI AUTOMATIC DECLASSIFICATION GUIDE 
EXIHPTIOH CODE ZSXUl 
DATE 03.-03-2009 . 


Re 


United States v. W 


O 

Mark Felt, 


et al. 


Dear Judge Bryant: . ‘ 

This responds to Francis J. Martin's two letters to you dated' 
March 30. 1979, one not under seal and the second under seal. Trl 
the unsealed letter, Mr. Martin asserts' that "the government has | 
completed its discovery". We believe that assertion to be incor^c 
and that other assertions contained in that letter are most misleap 
We are presentlyj reviewing our records and certain documents we 
received only Friday, March 30, 1979 in order to document a Motion 
to Dismiss for Failure to Comply with Court-Ordered Discovery. We 
expect to file this motion no later than Friday, April 6 , 1S79. 

The areas in which we presently believe the government's response 
to the Court's order to be incomplete are as follows: 



1. The government has failed to provide the defense 
with access to at least 500 'documents from foreign 
governments relating to the foreign travel and 
contacts of members of the Weatherman Underground 
Organization (WUO) and their collaboration witlSf^.y.. 
agents of foreign powers which were received by , ^ 
the FBI and/or contained in the files of the FB]j^J-/7^^^y. 
during the time period' relevant to the indictment'';“==*-4aLa.4H= 


2. The government has failed to provide the defense^? JUN 12 1979 
with access to all documents generated fay the 
National Security Agency, relating to the f preigrf—^ 
connections of the WUO, and which were received 
by the FBI and/or contained in the files of the FBI 
during the time period relevant to the indictment; 


ALL iNFOEiiATioN coHTAiKED Greenberg/Gray-3067 

HEFEIH IS OTCLA33IFIED EXCEPT ^ 

WHERE SHOrai OTHERWISE 


5 JUN 131979 




nr ^4 s 




.AW orriCES 

HEN, GETTtNGS ANOTHER 


Bryant 





onorable William B. 
:.pril 2, 1979 
Page Two 


3. 


4. 


5. 


6 . 


7. 


8 . 



The government has failed to provide the defense 
with documents relating to surreptitious entries 
other than those charged in the indictment which 
took place during the period of the indictment; 

The government has exceeded the authority to protect 
pending investigations and intelligence: sources and 
methods granted in the Protective Order of December 
22, 1978^ by totally withholding documents falling 
.within the scope of the Court's discovery order 
containing such information rather than by providing 
such documents to defense counsel with. ;hppropri ate 
redactions; 

The government has withheld production of documents 


I 


tending to show Presidential and Attorney General 
approval of the use of surreptitious entries; 




0 ,■ 


The government has withheld production of innumerable j 
relevant documents generated by the .Department of 
Justice in response to or inviting relevant FBI 
documents that have been produced to the defense; 




15 

<l' 

/V^O 




The government has failed to provide the defense 
with a quantity of documents furnished the Department 
of Justice by the FBI specifically to be turned 
over to the defense in this case; ^ 




government has failed to provide the defense 
with documents falling within the Court's discovery 
order specifically designat ed, descr it^d. and requested 
by the defense;. ^ (^c,/c> y 




bl 


9. The government has failed to provide the defense with 
access to innumerable "other copies" of documents 
from the 1537 lost and destroyed “tickler" files 
from the IS-2 Section of the Domestic Intelligence 
Division; which the government has previously 
maintained ‘ as being readily available in the main 
bureau files; 

10. Access to documents is being improperly restricted. 
Defense counsel is being forced to review documents 
in the vault that are not classified SCI. These 
documents should have been turned over to the defense 





o 


Greenberg/Gray-3068 




Wm/ ©rriCES 

HCN. Gettings anojwer 


honorable Williaiu B. Bryant 
"April 2 , 1979 
Page Three . 




With respect to the sealed letter^ we wish to register herein 
strong objection to any ^ parte presentation to the Court by the 
government of its position on any issue in this case. We have not 
sought such privilege on behalf of Mr. Felt for any reason at any 
stage of the proceedings thus far and we believe spch e?^ parte 
practice/ when unconsented to by opposing counsel, to be totally 
foreign to legitimate procedure in a criminal case. On April 6, 
1979/ when we submit our motion to dismiss on the discovery issue, 
we also intend to. submit a memorandum in support of the objection 
we here raise to ex parte proceedings. We respectfully request 
that the Court conduct no camera and/or e^x parte proceedings in 
connection with the matters raised in the sealed letter from Frank 
Martin of March 30, 1979 until we have had an opportunity to be 
heard on the propriety of proceeding in such manner. 

We would deeply appreciate your Honor allowing us until Friday 
to present the above papers to the Court., We have no objection to 
allowing the government a reasonable time to respond with a hearing 
at a time thereafter of mutual convenience to the Court and counsel 
If there is any problem with proceeding as outlined above, we 
respectfully request that we be so advised. 


Very truly yours, 

Brian P. Gettings 


cc: Francis' J. Martin, Esquire 

Thomas A. Kennelly, Esquiie 
Alan I. Baron, Esquire 


i 




Greenberg/Gray-3069 







i-Vj- 


' « OPX'ONAU FORM NO’. IO ' ; 

* JOLY I073 EOiTior; ■ 

' ' *-*" '''.caA rPMR 141 CF?;; lol.ii.a 



‘UNITED';.STATES'GOVERimEjirr'l®'!^Sii®ifttS^lifKii%I^jSiv , ,• ' 


^ -H. Webster, "Director 

V,-. Federal- Bureau of .Investigation 


FROM 


- -date; -April' 23, . 1979 

I:'/ : . ;;'•' PBH-.FJMz'ains .-■;' 

..... ■■■-■■ 


' lip -; B ! ;,’ Heymann'-^iBv ^ 

1 i s t ant : At t orney ;i.Gen( 

.min a 1 : D ivi s i on . . ; j; * ; 

subject:, . Unauthorized Disclosure of Classified - Information 


'■y,Asslstant■^Attorney^lGenerdl■^4^:i'»;|f|i|:';^;^■;;);y^y'^f^|i^;^,:"^ ' 

", Criminal- Division, '-''"iy ,' ':’ 


'• -■ >'¥/ 









• : ' Reference,, is - made . to your, memprandum of February 14.’,:"- y]yk..y::_ 

' 1979 , regarding the'Lxmauthorizedj disclosure ; of ? classified. 

; materials Plea?e;;provide ^copiesi.pf:fl:he./following!;jdocumdritsft 
which will be,' of assistance'- in’-making^ full ; reply -it’o tbe5 .■;<■■'};■ ■ . ' ' 
issues , you'^ha-ve . raised. ., ' '■ zy , ' ''- 'yy 


G 




CO 


■ l;.y:-;..'l. Director to : Assistants AttomeyyGeneralf;i-r: -.-.-y; 

, Civi.1'. Rights;-: Division ;''-'6,/22 / 76 i iclds? if icat^i^ :■ 

-proceduresr.yyy.;;!:; y^, -.'y-y'^yy-yy^- 





■ : ■:■ y:- yZy ._Assis -tant'-'Af fomey :"',General,':;£Civil;;.Rights . . ... -...» 
Division : toiDireCtor -6/25 /:76';f-cle;^ances -for® 

- attorneys '.^iy Say 1 .-'.= ' ;s;. yyi.jyy&iiysM£^i^iMy€y^'\-’-'yy '--V 'V. ' 'yy~ 

' ■y-''yy;yy-X- 

ay; -'-'fS .y Director ' to ^Attorney. 'General; .'.6/29,/76 ;?;:soutry^ 
line d clear ance; pro cediire s, :f or de f ens e at t omey s ^ y - 


a .l-^4i'-’Difect6r to 'Assistanty'Attorriey GenerAilvly; 

Civil -Rights-. .Division 7/26/76 ;:':’ :expres;sedlconGerri^y^||s|^i;;sl^^ 
over , pr otect ion .of, idlassified ’national' Security — /yyyyj^. 
information -. sy'-l' 

‘ yl 6/21/^ 8 1 interview with .* Dick vLongvly-^ 


:;6.- Director to Attorney General; 9/3/76: ; re 


questing r 



- ...iK-V-'- -a-i 


'.4? 

■ , 9/7/76 f orwardingf 




' '■ 7 .'. , As s i s t an t ' Attorney .General .to Director; 




. way ^- 1-1979; 



j^gsmcsnnofta yes)"2CK*jw*'T‘ 




^ i the Fayrpil Savings Plan ^ i 



- ... “V 

"yyM 

yMm 













".8 ;. . Deputy' Assopiate^Director^^^tp-rskblnik; '' 2/10/78 >( 
2/6/78 r vclassification ' of Grand ••Jury materials.. 


9 . * ‘ Deputy Associate .Director to Benjamin-. R. '- . 

•,/ Ciyiletti; , 4/24/78 redaction of discovery documents . 



' 10 . , Security -•Of ficer/. to Department- of justice -'v^:/'-,' 

Security;.,pfficer;.'i:5/5/78;, re: ■, unmarked,- classified )■' vM''?-’ 

... \ FBI. materal.,.in Task-:, Force possession: - 

. 11. ' - Deputy -As spciate. Director. to'^Deputy Assis-tant -i. 

. Attorney, General Criminal Division; 5/19/78 ;;tSCr'..: , . v . 

' -/ .■;-;iinformation.:in. Task Force possession.. ,:.'. ;;* ■; , ‘ 






REPLY TO 
ATTN OF. 



SUBJECT: 


United States v 


L. Patrick Gray III, et al Defense Discovery 


Federal Bureau of Investigation 
Special Office for Defense Discovery 
Room 6888, Hoover Building 
Attn: Mr. Brennan 
Washington DC 20535 

1. We have reviewed the AFOSI information contained in the attached 
documents and have declassified it in accordance with current Air Force 
directives. We have bracketed in red that information which "(c) release 
would constitute undue embarrassment or damage to unrelated third parties," 
and in black we have bracketed information under "(b) for protection 
of informants or sources." 




1 Atch 

FBI Discovery Documents 





HEPlIl IS UIICL1S3IFIED 

DATE 03™03™2009 BY 65179 cMti/baTj/sbs 


When Atch Nr — L is (are) withdrawn 

or not attached, the classification of 

correspondence 

will be cancelled in accordance with AFR 205-1 



Greenberg/Gray-3072 



LAW OFFICES t 


eA/ie/^ 


^^mAsc^cm/ %/ 4^ 



JOHN P. DIUGUID** 
THOMAS L. SIEGEL* 
THOMAS A. KENNELLY* 

KARL W. PILGER* 
ELIZABETH J. WILLIAMS** 


April 3, 1979 


OIJTSIBE SOUBCS 


Sf 

O 


Bryant 


OF COUNSEL 
HOWARD S. EPSTEIN* 

MARYLAND OFFIC ES 

107 W. JEFFERSON ST. 
ROCKVILLE, MD. 204 90 

S737 RRANCH AVENUE 
HfLLCRCST HEIGHTS. 

Maryland 20ost 


'kll IHFeEKATlOli-XOKTAIMED ' 

HEREIN is' DNCLisSIFIED 

'date 03-03-2009 BY 63179 (Mh/baw/sbs 


The Honorable William B . 

Chief Judge 

United States District Court 
for the District of Columbia 
U. S. District Courthouse 
Washington, n. C. 20530 

Re: Uni''€eH~States°'°^ Gray, et al . 

Criminal No. 78-r7'9'~” 

Dear Judge Bryant: 

On behalf of Mr. Miller, we have now carefully 
examined the documents which the government has turned ove 
since the hearing on March 15th. These consist of: 

. . Approximately 37 RBI documents containing 

information from the CIA 

Approximately 12 FBI documents containing 

Sensitive Compartmented, Inf ormation 

Approximately 25 documents from the White 
House (National Security Council and thf 
President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory 
Board) I-I JUN 12 1979 

. Approximately 150 FBI documents containist^®® 
information from the Bureau ' s own sources 

We wish to inform the Court that the government 
has not provided us with any documents from the National 
Security Agency nor any documents from foreign intelligence 
sources concerning foreign connections or foreign collabora- 
tion by the Weatherman organization. We understand that 
the volume in these two categories i^upwards of 500 docu- 


ments . 








ii!® SNC, BEHIND nu^ 

53 JUN 131979^ 




Greenberg/Gray-3073 




The Honorable William B. Bryant 
April 3, 1979 
Page Two 


These are the very documents which are at the 
heartof our continuing controversy with the government. 

All of them were in the files of the Intelligence Division 
of the FBI at the time Mr. Miller headed that division. 

They are still in the FBI files. 

These are the same documents 'which the Court 
ordered turned over to us at the chambers conference on 
February 22nd and in open court on March 15th. 

In view of this development / 'ior rather lack of 
development, a motion to dismiss the indictment would now 
seem to be in order. Attached hereto, its a copy of the 
motion we have filed today. 

We also take issue with the government ' s proposed 
intent to assert a State Secrets privilege and to make ex 
parte and in camera submissions in the discovery process. 
The government previously made such attempts in connection 
with its proposed Supplementary Protective Order which the 
Court rejected. It is well recognized that a State Secrets 
privilege is not available in criminal prosecutions. United 
States V. Andblschek , 142 F.2d 503 (2nd Cir.:1944), and 
that ^ parte proceedings are to be avoided in resolving 
discovery issues, Alderman v. United States, 394 U.S. 165, 
180-185 (1969) .1/ 

We see no value in permitting the government to 
continue to avoid its discovery obligations by once more 
raising these arguments. 


More detailed discussions of these issues have been 
previously submitted in "Defendant Miller's Objections 
to Proposed Supplementary Protective Order" (pp. 7-9) 
and "Memorandum of Defendant, L. Patrick Gray, III, in 
Response to Government's Motions in Limine" (pp. 14-23). 


Greenberg/Gray-3074 












F-2: 209(D)l-39; CCT; IQ/im 

209(B) 1-29; PFIAB; 10/2/78 

, 226; Huston Plan; 11/8/78 

245A-V; Huston supplement; 11/20/78 

F-3; 253 (A) 1-5; Intelligence Division redesignation; 
1/30/78 

F-A: 209(F) 1-47; Keith; 11/2/78 


2,. This matter will be addressed separately prior to 
March 30.:.:. c i 

3. Your list, submitted as Attachment A to Unresolved 
Pretrial Matters, and other lists for which you request ex- 
planations of redactions have been forwarded to the FBI for 
processing. Once discovery is completed we will orally advise 
you of the generic nature of the redacted material. VThile 
there is a large volume of material involved, please note 
that many redactions pertaining to foreign influence have 
been lifted in light of Judge Bryant's recent discovery 
-order. 

,4. Mr. Sol Lindenbaum has been telephonically contacted 
■and asserts that he never authorized any national security 
electronic surveillances. His involvement in the approval 
process for wiretap applications was limited to Title III 
requests. Mr. Lindenbaum further asserts that to his know- 
ledge no Attorney General ever delegated^^ this authority with 
respect to national security wiretaps between 1952 and 1975. 

5. A copy of the Guidelines for Foreign Intelligence 
collection and Foreign Counterintelligence Investigations is 
enclosed herein as discovery document #316., 

6. Copies, of the specific documents you have requested 
have been, and are being made available as rapidly as possible. 
You are reminded that these are documents that you or your 
agents have previously seen during discovery and they are 
currently available to you at the Bureau. It is the govern- 
ment's position that discovery of these documents is complete. 
The government will continue to provide copies of specific 
documents as requested. 




Greenberg/GPay-3078 





•f.y: 

“\P.'y 


3 - 


7. Copies of Grand Jury exhibits that are not known to 
iiave been previously fuimished to ynn during Hisrnvpry are 
attached hereto as discovery items 


:b3 


8. Requires no rational response. 

9. See response to paragraph three. 

in Ynii have previously been furni shed a memor andum from 


J 


has indi- 


as discovery item #254A. 

Gated that the first time he ever received information (other 
than public source information) concerning the Bureau* s 
utilization of bag jobs in Weatherman cases was the occasion 
in 1978 that is reflected in his memorandum. You should also 
be advised that no current or former Departmental employee 
is being represented by attorneys from the Civil Division in 
defense of the civil suit in New York, That decision is wholly 
Tmrelated to any issue of contemporaneous "knowledge*'of 
bag jobs by Department of Justice personnel. 


be 

b7C 


11. With respect to the documents requested in your 

letters of March 1 and March 12, we can advise you that at 
least some of that material has already been provided in 
0 ;ther discovery materials. In addition, some of the requested 
aittachments are not discoverable. We are processing these 
materials expeditiously; those that are discoverable will be 
provided shortly. ^ 

12. The documents referred to in the first paragraph of 
your March 20, 1979, letter are enclosed as are the requested 
inven.tories . As in our response to paragraph six, the 
documents you specifically request are not being treated as 
*’*unresolved discovery*'. The FBI has been provided with a 
copy of your letter; please note that documents not circled 
were not produced because of insufficient identifying data. 


13. There are three attachments to discovery documents 
186-195. Two of those attachments do not relate in any way 
tro: the subject matters of this case and are not discoverable. 
The^ third attachment, an lEC intelligence estimate on student 
demonstrations in 1971 is not believed to. .be discoverable 
because it does not pertain to the Weatherman. However, 
having undertaken to provide it, the document has been pro- 
cessed and is available to you. for inspection at Mr . Daly * s 
©ffice . 


Greenberg/Gray-3079- 





14. The Government has no Jencks obligations with respect 
to participants at the dinner at Mr. Hoover's residence.- 
Our Brady obligations have been fulfilled by our letter of 
May 17 , 1978, wherein we notified you that you may wish to 
Interview Messrs. Ehrlichman, Mitchell and Nixon. 

15 and 16. We are prepared to work with you in an e;ffort 
to arrive at factually-accurate stipulations concerning 
"Foreign Connections" and "Policies and Practices'.'. To that 
end, we will be more than happy to make available documents 
that will assist in resolving factual disputes with respect to 
those issues. Such documents are unrelated to the government's 
discovery obligations. We will devote our full attention to 
these matters as soon as possible after March 30. 



Attorney 

Criminal Division 





t • i' 


jERais Leonard 
Harvey B. Cohen 
Brian P. Gettings 
David E. Sher 
William L. Stauffer, Jr. 
Joanne F. Alper 
James T. Devine 
Frank W. Dunham, Jr. 

or cou*«»CL 

Gerry Levenberg 


o 



LAW OFFICES 

Leonard, Cohen, Gettings and Sher 

SUITE SSO 

1700 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE. N. W. 

Washington, D. C. 2 00 06 


(202) a72-lOB& 



Virginia Offices 

1^00 NORTH UHLE STREET 
COURTHOUSE SQUARE 
Arlington, Virgin lA 222(6 
1703) S25-23eO 


= February 6, 1979 


Francis J. Martin, Esquire 
Criminal Division 
Department of Justice 
Washington, D.C* 20530 


All IlFOEJiiTIOl. COimilED 
HEPl-Il IS OTCLISSIFIED 
DATE 03^03-2009 -Bt 65179 cMi/baw/sDs 


Barnet D, Skolnik, Esquire 
Special Assistant United 
States Attorney 
6233 Slender Sky 
Columbia, Maryland 21044 


Re : United States v. W. Mark Felt, 6t al. 


Gentlemen: . 

Enclosed are three Stipulations. The St^P^l^'^ion on "Policies 
and Practices" deals with the past practices ' and procedures of the 
Department of Justice in dealing v;ith surreptitiouis entries 
(warrantless) and warrantless electronic surveiMance . The second 
concerns the 1972 terrorist surreptitious entries- authorized by 
then Director L. Patrick Gray, III. The third enclosed Stipulation 
deals with the "foreign connections** of the Weather Underground. 

V7e are doubtful that a trial mechanism can be devised which can 
both adequately protect national security and acccjrd fairness to 
the rights of the defendant, I4r. Felt. The three Stipulations we 
have drafted represent our best effort to express in nonclassif ied 
form the facts which we believe could be establislted at; trial through 
legally admissible evidence only if national security .cohcej-ns , which 
you have alleged, were disregarded. . Accordingly, we m.ight be 
willing to accept, in lieu of live testimony and <topximentary evidence 
to the same effect, these three Stipulations enclosed herewith. If 
you are not even willing to entertain something along the lines of 
the enclosures, we will pursue the matter no furtlier. On the other 
hand, if you believe our proposal has some degree of merit, please 
advise so we may begin serious discussion. It is our belief that 
there is nothing contained in the proposed Stipulaition which does 
not have a basis in fact. 


ATTACHMENT B 


Greenberg/Gray-3081 



LAW OFFICES 

Leonard, Cohen, Gettings and Sher 

SUtTC S50 

1700 PCNNSYLVANIA AVCNUE. N. W. 

Washington, D. C. 2000e 

(2021 672-1095 

March 21, 1979 


Francis J. Martin, Esq- 
Criminal Division 
Department of Justice 
Washington, D.G. 20530 

Dear Frank: 

Our meeting of 3/19/79 concerning purely logistical problems 
in providing information relating to the FBI's use of the surrep- 
titious entry technique v^as helpful and your subsequent permission 
to examine certain FBI files seems to be a step in the right direc- 
tion in our efforts to identify, quantify and qualify the use of the 
technique of surreptitious entry by the FBI in the past. We of 
course will not object if this aspect of discovery is not capable 
of being certified as complete by 3/30/79. Of course, v;e do not pre- 
sume to speak for Mr. Kennelly or the Court and certainly do not intend 
to waive any discovery rights by agreeing not to protest if good- 
faith efforts leave this particular discovery avenue still open when 
the Court-imposed deadline is . reached. 

‘ t 

For your assistance, we here take the time to list other items 
of discovery which our records reflect as outstanding. We believe 
the completion of discovery on the following itei^s should be accom- 
plished before any certification is made to the Court that discovery 
in this case is complete: 

• 1. Original formal discovery requests granted by the Court 
in its Memorandum and Order of August 17, 1978 to- wit : A. 14, C- 1,2 ' 
and 4, F. 2-4. We recognize that you might consider your response 
to certain discovery requests of our co-def endants as responsive to ’ 
these particular requests of Mr. Felt which were granted by the Court 
last suimi^er but you have never so stated. If such be the case, please 
advise which documents already furnished are in response to which 
request as you have done f or ^our co-defendants and whether you have 
completed your response to these particular requests of Mr. Felt. 

2. Specifically, with regard to Felt discovery request C. 4, 
we call your attention to paragraph III of Defendant Felt's State- 
ment re Unresolved Pre-trial Matters. We have not received any third 

ILL IIFOElIATIOl COHTAIIED 
HEEEIN IS UlICLASSIFIED 
DATE 03-03-2009 BY 65179 dmli/BaTj/sbs 


ATTACHMENT C 


Virginia Offices 

woo NORTH UHLE STREET 
COURTHOUSE SQUARE 
Arlington, ViRGi N lA 32216 
(7031 52S-22eO 


Jerris Leonard 
Harvey B, Cohen 
Brian R Gettings 
David E. Sher 
William L. Stauffer, Jr. 
Joanne F. Alper 
James T. Devine 
Frank W. Dunham, Jr. 
Mark D. Cummings* 

*MtMecn vmciMi* bar onlt 




.Greenberg/Gray-3084 




LAW OFFICES 


Leonard, Cohen, Gettings and Sher 

2 . 


With respect to the Stipulation on "Policies and Practice", if 
we were to agree we would not by so doing relinquish our outstanding 
discovery demand in this area* We would still want the right to 
discover documents relating to all instances where these techniques, 
as set forth in paragraphs 3 and 23 of -the Stipulation, were used, 
who approved their use, why and so forth* We want to make a 
compilation of the number of times each technique was used and want 
to select out for comparison purposes as many examples of specific 
uses as we choose. We not only offer that we will make a good 
faith attempt not to select any examples that have classification 
problems, we guarantee that there will be none. 

The Stipulations on " foreign connection" and the "1972 terrorist 
surreptitious entry", on the other hand, would terminate any need 
for further discovery in these areas with one caveat. V7ith respect 
to the proffered Stipulation on the 1972 terrorist surreptitious 
entry we suggest this only if we can be assured that the facts concern- 
ing that event will be limited at trial to those contained in the 
Stipulation- If any additional facts or circumstances concerning the 
event are admitted, we renew our request for full discovery on this 

event and the right to fully explore it at trial. 

The Stipulations enclosed herein have b^en drafted, in good 
faith, to avoid any reference to a classified national security matter. 

If we are wrong and these Stipulations do contain matters which should 

be protected as national security information, please advise forthwith. 

Finally, our response to the motion ^ limi^ne may well be contin- 
gent on your position concerning the Stipulatioris we have hereby 
tendered for your consideration. It is therefore imperative that we 
receive your reaction with regard to these Stipulations no later than 
noon on Thursday. .. 

^ Sincerely, 

■ LEONARD, COHEN, GETTINGS & SHER 



Brian P. Gettings 


BPGievb 

cc: U. S. District Judge 


Greehberg/Gray-3b85 




UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20530 


AAirtsa Kepir to ibe 
IJlvwca In^icftted 
«0^ Refer to Nuiober 

FJM:ams 


Frank W. Dunham, Esquire 
Leonard, Cohen, Gettings & Sher 
Suite 550 

1700 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20006 

Dear Frank, 







This will respond to ‘your letter of March 21 concerning 
certain incomplete ’’discovery" matters. I will cover them 
•in the sequence raised in your letter. 


r:p 

1-^' 

:lv 


1, For responses to formal discovery requests please refer 
to the follov/ing documents: 

A-14: Nixon file search, F-1 through L-4; 10/2/78 

Transcript of White House tape 2/16/78, con- 
versation with Nixon, Ehrlichman and Gray; 

. ; * 8/24/78 (Mr. Baron, alone, agreed to conditions 

for release as set by counsel for Mr. Nixon.) 

Documents by or for Nixon, Attorney General ' 

. ■ . Mitchell, other White House staff regarding ; ’ ■ . 

^ -v ' WUO. 230A-R; 11/16/78 

' Huston Plan, 226, 11/8/78 ^ 

^ - C-1; It is our understanding that you have made 

arrangements with Mr. Daly regarding organiza- 
tional charts. 

C-2: 5/25/78; The government made available approximately 

450 volumes of WUO files. 

11/14/78; A copy of Weatherman album listing 238 
. known Weathermen was provided with files not 
. previously tendered to be made available upon 

request. , > ^ ^ , 

.. ■’ C-4: -209 (A) 1-359 ; plans to deal with UTJO, including 

"Foreign Influence in the New Left"; 10/27/78 

, 246(B)l-8; DOJ file review; 12/28/78 ■ 

. / ' \ ^ ; 'ATTACHMENT D 

ILL IIFOPmTIOl 'COIJTAIIED ' ' Z' . ‘ ■; ■ - '' '' 

HEBE II IS OTIC LAS SI FIEI) • ' ' ' ' ^ 

D : , 1 ■ 









LAW OmCCS F 

Leonard, Cohen, Gettings 'and Sher 

Francis J. Martin, Esq. 

March :21, 1979 
Page Three 


We believe that, in addition to the foregoing, the Court's recent 
ruling that the Barker-Martinez defense is available to Mr. Felt 
coupled with your, earlier promise to provide Jencks & Brady materials 
30 days in advance of triab and considering the present posture of. 
the case, combine to make the following items fall within the scope 
of materials that should be provided to us before any good-faith 
certification can be made to the District Court that discovery in 
this case is complete: 

13. The attachments to documents 186-195 referred to in your 
9/1/78 letter. 

• d'encks and/or B rady materials referred to in your letter 
transmitting documents 80A-85L re 1969 dinner at Mr. Hoover's residence 
attended by Ehrlichman, Mitchell, Nixon and Tolson during which Hoover 
told anecdotes about surreptitious entries. * . • 

15. In addition to information concerning past specific uses 
of the technique of surreptitious entry, referred to in the opening 
paragraph of this letter and on which we are currently working together 
to pursue a suitable discovery solution, any other documents in the 
possession of the Department of Justice, incl\^ding the FBI, which 
would tend to support in whole or in part any of the factual assertions 
contained in the Stipulation on Policies and Practices forwarded by 
our letter of 2/6/79 . 

16. In addition to the third agency documents referred to in 
paragraph (2) above, ,any documents or evidence in\the possession of 
the government which would support the factual assertions contained in 
the Stipulation of Foreign Connections forwarded to you in our letter 
of 2/6/79. 

We have gone to considerable effort to catalog for you here 
those items of discovery which we in good faith, upon a thorough 
review of our files, believe remain outstanding. We have set these 
forth as an aid to you in assuring that all materials you have intended 
to give us or are obligated to give us have been delivered. 

'Sincerely,, 

^ COHEN^GETTINGS & SHER 

Frank W. Dunham^ Jr^ . .. , 


Grfeenberg/Gray-3087 


Request #8 was made in vacuo and should be disregarded, 
was left over from our Chicken ^^^^case . 


It 




LAW OFFICES 

Leonard, Cohen, Gettings and Sher ' 

be 

\ ^ -bvc 

Francis J. Martin, Esq* 

h5arch 21, 1979 

Page Two * 

1 / 

agency documents concerning the foreign involvement, collaboration or 
travel of the Weathermen. Of course, we are aware that you need no 
reminder on this item since this particular area of discovery is causing 
the principle problem as a result of Judge Bryant's ruling on the 
Barker-Martinez defense. 


3. You have promised us an explanation of redactions in any * 
discovery documents for -which we specifically request such explanation. 
Our list submitted as Attachment A to Defendant Felt's Statement re 
Unresolved Pre-trial Matters requesting an explanation of redactions 

in specifically identified documents has not been responded .to. 

4. Response to our letter dated 2/5/79 re approval of 
electronic surveillance in national security matters by Sol Lindenbaum 
or other DOJ personnel other than the Attorney General. 

5. Information re guidelines past and present for obtaining . 
executive approval of national security intelligence techniques 
referred to in our letter of 2/14/79. 

6. 16 of the specific documents requested in. our form listings 
of documents (#973-989). 


7. Copies of the documents shov/n witnesses in their testimony 
before the Grand Jury requested in our letter of 2/23/79. 

8. Everything that is handwritten we want typewritten (double 

spaced) and everything that is typewritten (single spaced) we want 
handwritten unless it is neither or xeroxed in which case we are 
entitled to both.Z/ . 


9. Documents requested and explanations of redactions referred 
to in our letter of 2/27/79. 


10. Response to our request for 
letter of 2/28/79 . 


materials per our 


11. Requested documents per our letter of 3/1/79 supplemented 
by our letter of 3/12/79. 

12. Documents and explanations of deletions of documents per 
our letter of 3/20/79. 

Greenberg/Gray-3088 


y 

By third agency we mean an agency of the U.S. government sep- 
erate and apart from the Department of Justice and/or documents 
originating from foreirm oovernmen ts or forcicyn .Intel licence scrvciccc 




































FEDERAL- BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION 
FOIPA 

DELETED PAGE INFORMATION SHEET 

No Duplication Fees are charged for Deleted Page Information Sheet(s). 

Total Deleted Page(s) ~ 9S 
Page S — ■ b 1 
Page 14 —■ 


Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 15 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 16 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 1 S — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 19 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 21 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 22 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 24 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 25 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 26 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 2T — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 2S — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 29 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 30 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 31 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 32 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 33 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 34 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 35 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 36 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 37 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 


Page 3S — ■ 



Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 39 ~ 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 40 ~ 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 41 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 42 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 43 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 44 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 45 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 52 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 53 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 54 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 55 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 56 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 5S — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 59 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 61 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 62 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 64 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 65 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 66 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 67 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 6S — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 69 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 70 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 71 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 72 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 



Page "73 ~ 
Pursuant to 
Page 74 ~ 
Pursuant to 
Page 75 ~ 
Pursuant to 
Page 76 ~ 
Pursuant to 
Page 77 — ■ 
Pursuant to 
Page 7S ~ 
Pursuant to 
Page 79 ~ 
Pursuant to 
Page SO — ■ 
Pursuant to 
Page S 1 ~ 
Pursuant to 
Page S2 ~ 
Pursuant to 
Page S3 ~ 
Pursuant to 
Page S4 ~ 
Pursuant to 
Page S5 — ■ 
Pursuant to 
Page S6 ~ 
Pursuant to 
Page S7 — ■ 
Pursuant to 
Page SS — ■ 
Pursuant to 
Page S9 ~ 
Pursuant to 
Page 90 —■ 
Pursuant to 
Page 91 — 
Pursuant to 
Page 92 — 
Pursuant to 
Page 93 — 
Pursuant to 
Page 94 — 
Pursuant to 
Page 95 — 
Pursuant to 
Page 96 — 
Pursuant to 
Page 97 — 
Pursuant to 
Page 9S — 


Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 
Sealed Court Order 



Pursuant to Sealed Court Order 
Page 99 ~ 

Pursuant to Sealed Court Order 
Page 100 — 

Pursuant to Sealed Court Order 
Page 101— 

Pursuant to Sealed Court Order 
Page 161-— 

Sealed Court document 
Page 162 —■ 

Sealed Court document 
Page 163 — 

Sealed Court document 
Page 164 — 

Sealed Court document 


Page 166 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 1 67 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 16S — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 169 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 171 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 172 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 173 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 174 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 175 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 176 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 

Page 177 — 
Pursuant to 

Se 

aled 

Court 

Order 


Page 200 — Duplicate 
Page 205 — Duplicate 
Page 206 — Duplicate 
Page 212 — 

Pursuant to Sealed Court Order 
Page 213 — 

Pursuant to Sealed Court Order 
Page 214 — 

Pursuant to Sealed Court Order